The Big Picture: Junk Drawer: Reloaded

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Okay, Bob. I can see your point about the "I know a black guy and he's not offended by this." But what about this point?

I am a male who is African American (With some Scott in there too) and I'm not offended by it at all. I know people who speak like that. Hell, some of my family members speak like that. (Much to my annoyance) Am I just ignorant then? Do I somehow fail to see a jab at my ethnicity or "culture" (Which I think is garbage anyways. No one should use culture as a method of living, but simply learning from.) that others catch?

Or for that matter, how is RE5 racist? I'm with Capcom on this. Nearly no one had any issues when we were blowing away people in a Spanish village with shotguns, but the moment it goes to Africa people get angry? Really? I come from an area that is 40% people who speak Spanish yet those who played the game loved it from start to finish. I'm not even offended by Sheva's outfit. I think it was a design choice and honestly it's a good detailed one. Why is it that people are offended by this tend to mainly not even BE African American or black or whatever you prefer while people who are minorities are not?

Are you saying that minorities are simply unaware and ignorant of a potential insult?

Jennacide:
Dear lord, don't bring back Jem, it wasn't ever good in the first place. I can understand why they revived My Little Pony. I was never a huge fan, but I understood it's attraction. Though, I don't quite get the insane fanaticism is has now. Yes, it's drawn cute. And? Why did the "brony" thing suddenly blow up? Is there something I missed? It's a kids cartoon, why exactly ARE twenty something guys suddenly obsessed with it?

Not saying it's a bad thing, but I have this funny suspicion that it's just another 'hipster' trend that I'm really going to get annoyed with.

It's not a douche bag (a lot of hipsters don't act like this) trend, much to popular, also, you shouldn't stereotype, it is just short of racism.

The easiest way to understand is to watch it, most of us won't care if you don't like it, in fact, we understand if you don't. We just don't like it when we get attacked from people who haven't watched it. How do you support your argument when you have no facts? The ones you see arguing on our side just happens to be our loud ones that effect every fan base.

Anyone remember the glut of what TV Tropes calls Spin-off Babies? Seems to be what Bob's going for here with MLP:FIM, sort of. For some reason I doubt it will happen, though. I don't know why, it just seems like something the suits will fail so badly at it that they'll never get something to air. Then ten years from now someone will dig up the awful pilots for Retsupurae to tear apart.

Feminist has never been an insult, that's what feminazi is for.

Eternal_Lament:

omegawyrm:

Father Time:

Yes all of that is masculinity's fault despite the fact that you can find rapists, spousal abusers etc. amongst women. It makes sense in a stupid nonsensical sort of way.

Edit: Or do you just conveniently define masculinity as those bad traits?

Yeah, some women probably take advantage of their gender to get unfair treatment and that's not fair, but you're going to have to get the hell over it.

Men still enjoy far larger amounts of privilege and power than women do. You don't think it's fair that we have to make concessions to a group that's been disenfranchised for all of history until very recently? Too fucking bad! This problem is bigger than you and just because you think women are given equal treatment to men in all of your personal experiences doesn't mean that no one is being discriminated against anywhere. We can concede a whole hell of a lot and still enjoy massive social double standards in our favor that are so ingrained into the cultural psyche that we see them as our rights.

Isn't that sort of going against the point of trying to ease tension? If what we're trying to do is create equality amongst the genders, wouldn't the better answer be to keep both genders on a true equal field, so that when the newer generation grows up they can realise that men and women are pretty much the same (bar some obvious physiological dfferences of course) and that the previous stand-points of one gender being superior to another being viewed as just plain wrong?

This method of "Well I guess there are men out there that are still privelaged, so here's some privelages that neither gender has had before" seems counter-intuitive to that, because it only in-grains seeds of resentment in men who because they had no part in the previous bad behaviour yet are being with-held certain privelages because they are being treated as being responsible for the previous behaviour, especially if these men have not experienced these privelages that people say they do (not once has my gender given me any special benefits that were not given to women, so I'm having a tough time figuring out what these privelages are exactly), and for women it only in-grains seeds of confusion, as the newer generation doesn't understand why they are given privelages for things they themselves have never personally encountered or experienced, and it brings to question if what they accomplish is actually a feat of their own strength and talent or is a result of gender specific privelages.

In other words the idea of men and women are equal can never become a part of the norm because already men and women are being treated differently because of certain privelages the gender either has or doesn't have.

And lets say then it comes to the point where baring the extra privelages given out of "balance" are finally equal to the point of where it's the same, what then? Are the extra privelages just taken away, or are they left around? We then run into the situation of either removing privelages that themselves have been in-grained into the sociatal psyche (since if your belief that several male privelages are in-grained as the norm today, this mean the same could happen with female privelages) which in turn causes an up-heaval from those claiming the action is trying to make one gender inferior to another (which would sort of put an end to the whole job of trying to inspire the notion of equality), or the privelages remain in which case again mean and women wouldn't technically be equal at that point. It would seem the best option then at that point would be to phase out the extra privelages gradually as the measure of equality rises, but this brings the issue of a) which privelages take precident to stay and which don't and b) if no one is able to agree about what raises the measure of equality then how can people start to phase out?

Look, do you really believe that discrimination based on gender has no affect on our day to day lives? Really? Statistically, women hold far fewer positions of power and make less money than men. Is that not compelling enough evidence of social inequality? As anecdotal evidence, I know many more women who were emotionally traumatized by abuse during childhood than men. I also live on a college campus and since a young woman went missing a couple months ago in the area, just about every woman I know is afraid to be outside at night. None of the men I know give it a second thought. What evidence would be good enough for you to accept that men are automatically granted greater social privilege by virtue of their gender?

Doing nothing and ignoring it is not going to make a history of social privilege go away. We have to actually try. We have to make an effort for equality.

Now, you said many times that the extra privileges we're giving women are unfair. Can I ask what those privileges are? I think it's pretty easy to see the the privileges that men have. We're better represented in politics and business, we make more money, and the most popular narratives in our culture contain active men and passive women. What concessions are we making to women that are so egregious by comparison? As far as I can tell the big things seem to be that businesses and agencies are now legally obligated to treat women equally, which seems to be only fair, and there is a social pressure to eliminate the old ways of thought that are still left over from when women literally didn't have equal rights. I don't see what we're giving them socially that is so unfair.

As for the future, I don't have the answer to that. I can't predict how society is going to change. I want to believe that all social inequality is going to be eliminated in the next few decades, but I have no idea if that will happen. All I know is that I can see a social injustice in the present that I can help fix by believing that women are just as capable and valid as men and acting towards women to affirm that with consideration towards the history of the conflict between genders, and I can ask others to do the same. I don't think that's a lot to ask.

going to respond to this other post that was made while I was writing that last bit

Father Time:

omegawyrm:

Father Time:

Yes all of that is masculinity's fault despite the fact that you can find rapists, spousal abusers etc. amongst women. It makes sense in a stupid nonsensical sort of way.

Edit: Or do you just conveniently define masculinity as those bad traits?

Yeah, some women probably take advantage of their gender to get unfair treatment and that's not fair, but you're going to have to get the hell over it.

Our hero, ladies and gentlemen. Hypocritically defending unfairness against some while telling others to get over it.

omegawyrm:

Men still enjoy far larger amounts of privilege and power than women do. You don't think it's fair that we have to make concessions to a group that's been disenfranchised for all of history until very recently? Too fucking bad! This problem is bigger than you and just because you think women are given equal treatment to men in all of your personal experiences doesn't mean that no one is being discriminated against anywhere. We can concede a whole hell of a lot and still enjoy massive social double standards in our favor that are so ingrained into the cultural psyche that we see them as our rights.

I think you've quoted the wrong person.

Hypocrisy? Saying that you need to get over the little bit of unfairness that is imposed on you to make up for the far larger social unfairness imposed on a group you don't belong to is hypocritical? Damn you must have a self-centered worldview.

I might have conceded to you that the part of that about men feeling entitled to the privilege that they don't even want to admit they have would have been better aimed at one of the other posters who was complaining about Bob's statement that feminism is an important part of our culture, but now that I've read this second post it seems to me that you think in exactly the sort of way that I was upset about when I made that post, so I'll let it stand.

shadebreeze:

Fusioncode9:
He couldn't even pronounce Vita right...

[quote="TWEWER" post="6.313971.12734179"]Vee-tah.

I guess vitality is pronounced vee-tality then right?

shadebreeze:

Fusioncode9:
He couldn't even pronounce Vita right...

[quote="TWEWER" post="6.313971.12734179"]Vee-tah.

"You're saying it wrong," Harry heard Hermione snap. "It's Wing-gar-dium Levi-o-sa, and make the 'gar' nice and long."

>_>

Eri:

shadebreeze:

Fusioncode9:
He couldn't even pronounce Vita right...

[quote="TWEWER" post="6.313971.12734179"]Vee-tah.

I guess vitality is pronounced vee-tality then right?

Veetality sounds like a Mortal Kombat finisher where you disembowel your opponent with a carrot.

Or would that be a "vegality"?

I have gained respect for Bob after his comment about feminism.

Who was complaining about twilight because of the blatant pandering? (ok maybe some people complaining about pandering to guys getting called out, but not to girls)

As I remember the complaints centered around anti-feminism, horrible characterization, supporting abusive relationships, and the main character generally being the most selfish thing you could find outside of an ayn rand novel.

Oh yea, the racism complaints about deus ex, cloaked attacks on contemporary African-American culture.

I don't mind the Twilight werwolves being considered "ideal", mainly because that's what I would consider to be the ideal male. And just to be (mostly) unbiased, I support the "skinny pale dude" ideal. It provides an alternative along with reminding girls to be tolerant of whatever "skeletons" are in a boy's "closet" (given that they're negligible "rodent skeletons", if you know what I mean).

omegawyrm:

Snip.

This is going to be a long one, so here it goes:

I've heard about the statistics of women makiing less then men, something I'm willing to accept may be true, but since no one appears to wish to post where these statistics come from, I can only base my understanding on how money is divided based on the women I know, and the women I do know seem to make as much as a man would in the same field. So unless I see the statisitc (I'll look for it tomorrow seeing as how it's midnight right now) I will currently reserve my full judgement, erring on the side of what women tell me about it being equal pay till then.

As for the lack of representation of women in politics, I mentioned before in a thread about Feminism in Gaming that whether this is indicitive of gender discrimination isn't based on the full percentage, but rather why the percentage is like that. After all, percentage wise men are very under-represented in all my classes this year, but that in of itself isn't indicitive of some underline misandry, but may be due to simply other factors, such as the field of study in question or even the amount of men applying for school. There may indeed be the underline issue of gender affecting being considered to be brought in to the political sphere, which if shown to be the case as to why there are few women in politics would make me put my hands down and agree with you that there is some serious gender discrimination going on. But there's the problem, as far as I can tell no one has spoken out about not getting a position because of gender, and as far as I can tell there hasn't been a released study to show that it is in fact gender discrimiation that keeps most women out of politics (although if you are aware of such studies, post them in a reply and I will consider changing my view upon reading), which means there is probably another answer that may easily affect percentage that, much like studying if gender does affect position, can be studied by looking at the amount of women who do go through the procedures of getting into politics: not alot of women apply for jobs in politics. I have no proof of that mind you, but rather the point I'm making is that untill one studies the reason why women are under-represented in politics, one can't really make the argument either way that the percentage is proof of discrimination or (in the mind of a mysogynist) is proof of privelage without the context as to why the percentage is like that. Gender discrimination could be a factor, but so could other factors, such as personal interest of those who do and don't apply, both of which are views that can only really be taken once the context has been provided.

In regards to abuse, I know an equal amount of men and women who haven't been abused as children but have been abused by their partner. Want to know what the kicker is? Not only have some of these women been abused by other women. but most of the men I know who've been abused are either too ashamed to come forth or have tried to rationalize the abuse in an unhealthy way, because they know that they will never be taken seriously, by both men and women alike. Hell, I knew one TA (who according to her was one of the more level headed Feminists at the school, her words not mine) who sincerly believed that men can only be raped by other men, and that women can never really rape, or at least when they do it's only through what she considers the "male" form of sex (i.e. using artificial or surrogate dicks). That in my opinion is not only degrading to male rape victims, but also insulting to women, as it suggests that women can only be victims in situations of rape, never the rapist.

Hell when I was living on campus last year (at York University in Toronto which if anyone knows is often known for higher numbers of rape than other campuses in the city) the only thing both guys and girls were mostly worried about when walking alone was possibly being robbed or mugged, rape often being low on their mind.

As to answer your question about what evidence or proof of men having privelage just for being men, well as mentioned about the pay and politics distribution, links to either studies or whistle-blowers on the subject would certainly give me cause for change, but one thing that would probably solidify that is if you could find reported situations from the past 5-10 years of men who were incredibly un-qualified getting positions or getting ahead of women who were qualififed or more than qualified would certainly convince me that gender did play a role of privelage for males (although any link would do, a reported history would certainly have more validity than a single incident)

To answer the question about privelage, the idea about women only being the victim in abuse or rape cases while it is only the the male who can be the agressor or instigator is a pretty privliged view-point. When one considers that victim-survey reports often show that men and women are equally at risk to abuse and rape, both from the same sex and the opposite sex, while the actual amount reported would imply that mostly women are at risk (both the victim-survey and crime statistics are things I will link here when I wake up tomorrow), there seems to be a very glaring issue here, either that men are seen as always wanting sex or deserving the abuse or that women can never stoop to such low levels, both of which are viewpoints that certainly privelage abusive women the same way "She dressed like a slut, she asked for it" often privelages abusive men. While things such as payment in divorces has been equaled out over the past while, custody of the children is still something that often privelages women, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they'll be better parents or care-givers than the father, something that may or may not be true in each situation, but is still something that still is based on preceived notions about ability, something which in this case would certainly privelage women if the father was just as competent to raise the children and was denied custody out of the sole fact that people believe that the woman whill be the better parent (something which could've happened to me if it weren't for the fact that my parents were sick of the system at that point and decided to solve the issue themselves rather than go through the courts and make a messy situation) And if we're going to use media as a medium for privelage, just as several narratives feature attractive men and passive women, there is an equal amount where women are seen as the only voice of reason and men as either the naive or stupid ones. Now arguably one should be able to write a story once in a while where the man is attractive and the woman is passive and can also write a story once in a while where the woman is always the voice of reason and the man is always naive or stupid. So lets look at another way privelage comes up not so much in the making of narrative, but the criticism of narrative. Take the movie Drive for example. The movie, while receiving outstanding reviews, has been called a male-oriented film, something that I would agree with and would also agree that the female characters were'nt really all that developed. What do I disagree with though? The argument made that the movie is male-oriented not only because of how the characters are portrayed, but because MAJOR SPOILER HERE, DON'T LOOK IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN DRIVE Christina Hendricks character gets slapped around and then killed SPOILERS END HERE. Why is this considered a pro-man thing when throughout the movie there are men who are also slapped around (if not worse) and then killed as well? Because there is a general view that some take in which they belive violence against women of any kind when not used to explore and discuss violence against women is an act of trying to make women in film or literature subservant, even when violence and death is present in the narrative heavily with male characters. The idea that violence for no reason against women is somehow negative while violence for no reason against men is neutral (both of which I may add are just lazy from a creative point of view) is certainly something that could be argued to be a privelage if one connects it too the privelage of women not desrving violence while men deserve violence. And again, as I said before, as I have never felt any of the privelages that apparently come with being a man: when I hve been paid, I have been paid the same amount as my female co-workers. When in a store, I am given the same amount of attention from the workers there that is given to the female shoppers there. When receiving grades on assignments, my marks are roughly the same as other female students who do either as well or as bad as I usually do in the class. When in class, my opinions and my thoughts are respected as much as my female classmates opinions and thoughts are respected. When out in public, I am not talked to in a way that is different to how other women around me are talked to. I personally have not seen any of this privelage I apparently have.

And like you yes, I too would like to see a world where gender equality is the norm, where discrimination is an act of those who are just plain mean and not because of societal beliefs, but what I don't believe is the idea that accomodation=fixing. We can accomodate women all we want to make up for the short-comings they are faced, but that would lead nowhere as sooner or later things have to be fixed, not delayed. Sooner or later those accomadations have to be taken away as the measure of equality rises. I should make it clear, it's not the act of accomodating that worries me, what worries me is that if things take too long to fix that what we view as accomodations end up becoming a part of the norm.

internetzealot1:

No, really, the connotation of feminist has been negative since women earned civil rights? Because the day suffragists got away with it anybody pushing for female rights immediately became a stuck up bitch?
The day women got equal with men, any woman who continued pushing exclusively for women's rights became a stuck up bitch

and no feminist I know, myself included, has ever claimed to want women to be treated better than men, ever
Well no shit they're not going to straight come out and say it. And I'd put you, an "equalist" or something, in a different category anyway.

You would label me something different, but I'm not. I'm a feminist, not an "equalist" (which, as a movement, does not actually exist). You don't own the word, and your misuse of it isn't going to give it to you.

Oh, and I guess any black, hispanic, asian person who works for equal treatment and civil rights is a bigot? I mean, after all, they are technically equal since slavery got abolished, so they should shut the hell up, right?

Maaaan, you do suck. A lot.

Eternal_Lament:
snip.

I'm going to defuse your wall of text in a single sentence. Watch closely.

Where I live, 51 women have been killed by husbands, boyfriends or exes so far this year, while no men have died killed by their spouses.

Yeah, talk about "accommodating" to me now.

Ramzal:
Okay, Bob. I can see your point about the "I know a black guy and he's not offended by this." But what about this point?

I am a male who is African American (With some Scott in there too) and I'm not offended by it at all. I know people who speak like that. Hell, some of my family members speak like that. (Much to my annoyance) Am I just ignorant then? Do I somehow fail to see a jab at my ethnicity or "culture" (Which I think is garbage anyways. No one should use culture as a method of living, but simply learning from.) that others catch?

Or for that matter, how is RE5 racist? I'm with Capcom on this. Nearly no one had any issues when we were blowing away people in a Spanish village with shotguns, but the moment it goes to Africa people get angry? Really? I come from an area that is 40% people who speak Spanish yet those who played the game loved it from start to finish. I'm not even offended by Sheva's outfit. I think it was a design choice and honestly it's a good detailed one. Why is it that people are offended by this tend to mainly not even BE African American or black or whatever you prefer while people who are minorities are not?

Are you saying that minorities are simply unaware and ignorant of a potential insult?

I am glad another African American said this. I'd hate to use these words but white people feel so entitled to stand up for us it's honestly insulting. The differences Racist and stereotypical seems to be woefully lost to them. At least the vocal ones. I feel the ones that complain don't know the general culture at all.

Hey,
I don't know if anyone will read this but I wanted to make a small clarification.
The feminists today are not like the feminists from yesteryear. There are actually different feminist movements: the first wave feminists and the second wave feminists.
first wave feminists were the ones that were fighting for equality between the sexes. And they got that, some time a go.
The second movement (second wave feminists) are mostly dominated by the idea that women are inherently better then men. Most of the goals of feminism had already been met by the previous group so this movement has been hijacked by misandrists. People use today the word feminist as a swear because the word feminist bring to mind a misandrists that says she is a feminists.
People don't think about the first wave feminists when they say feminist.

Misandryst = woman that hates men
Most misandrists think and claim they are feminists, but they are not. And people should stop using the word feminist in a pejorative form.

just call them chauvinist misandrists! ^__^

MovieBob:

wraith428:
Feminism is not an insult but Masculism is... explain that one to me Bob.

150,000 years of human history/pre-history (give or take) of men having 100% absolute power over the lives (and, to be blunt, bodies) of women versus only about 40-50 (give or take) years of SOME women (primarily those fortunate enough to be born in so-called "first world" countries) having legally-protected equal status to men which is none the less STILL under constant threat re: anti-choice movements, male-reassertiveness ideologies, etc. The worst excess of our supposedly "feminist" modern culture is that men are occasionally denied certain levels of unfair privilige prior generations may have enjoyed, while the worst excesses of the "masculist" culture that preceded it included forced-subservience, casual spousal-abuse, female non-personhood and rape as a legally-unprovable "thing that happened" as everyday accepted ways of life.

That's why.

I could go on about being objective and the Need for fairness and equality on both sides of the boards but I won't. I can easily concede to your points. I would like to say that my point is at all types of sexism are bad things and if you are really reach for true equality you can't put one side on a pedestal.

DRTJR:
I wish we knew where Bob stood on the Magic of Friendship.

According to his twitter, he "likes it plenty".

I seriously doubt the very last point in the video, although I'm keeping my fingers crossed. A Rainbow Brite reboot that somehow doesn't suck would be awesome! I wouldn't mind an updated Jem either, though that would need an even bigger overhaul due to changes in fashion and music. She-Ra would be ok, but would have been better had the He-Man reboot not gotten cancelled so fast.

Strawberry Shortcake? Um, it already has a reboot. I haven't seen it, but from the DVD box art it looks really different. If memory serves, the whole point of the old show was that the kids either looked like or wore clothes resembling the food they were named after. The new SBSC wears freaking jeans and a t-shirt. I just don't get it at all.

I look forward to many more awful 80s cartoons coming back as FIM style reboots. I'm not so in to the ponies myself but I appreciate the silliness its popularity centers around.

Oh dear, I think you may have started another stint of threads on what people here think feminism is. If that's the case I may have to withdraw from the site for a while. I can't cope with another wave of complaints that men are the poor victims of an evil, feminist system.

Exactly like this:

AdrianRK:

The second movement (second wave feminists) are mostly dominated by the idea that women are inherently better then men. Most of the goals of feminism had already been met by the previous group so this movement has been hijacked by misandrists. People use today the word feminist as a swear because the word feminist bring to mind a misandrists that says she is a feminists.

*finds cover*

sergnb:

James Hobbley:
[quote="Shjade" post="6.313971.12735235"]I still don't understand how or why a My Little Ponies series became this internet phenomenon seemingly overnight. Or over any length of time.

Since I won't watch the show, I probably never will, either. It just seems bizarre to me.

Here's a suggestion if you don't want to watch MLP: It's exactly the same as Powerpuff Girls, but with movie and internet culture references.

Oh, and the most overrated stuff ever made too.

Did you watch EITHER of these shows?

Because PPG had significantly more pop-culture references than MLP.

For one thing, PPG was originally intended to be adult animation, back when it had the working title "The Whoopass Girls", and it was toned DOWN for Cartoon Network.

MLP was always intended to be aimed at 3-8 year olds, until the Internet decided that it is sooo cuuute and fuuuunnny. So far, we didn't see any episode that was written after it became a meme.

Just pointing it out, because it's funny that you fell for the same mistake that Bob accuses lazy execs of, that is, ignorantly believing that if it is popular with nerds, that can only happen because it is secretly full of nerdy jokes.

Of course there will be cheap knock-offs of My Little Pony. Fun fact though: Hasbro decided to put effort into this series because Michael Bay's "Transformers" went over so well.

Doublepost, my bad

By the way, do we even know whether or not Bronies are a financially significant audience for Hasbro to begin with?

Because "internet famous" can mean anything from a few thousand very active online posters, to millions, but the original MLP audience already includes ALL little girls, millions from the USA alone, and also everywhere else in the world.

It's likely that for Hasbro, and other pubishers, Bronies are an amusing, but statistically insignificant minority.

I got everything...
exept...
does he like or hate MLP FIM?
Im just curios (sorry for the spelling mistakes I've probebly made)

The reason why people who are not from minorities, but still get offended by things that could be considered ever so slightly racist, like RE5, is because they have nothing else to worry about. If these people were about to loose their house, their job and their wife/husband, I can assure you they wouldn't give a shit about anything offensive.
It's all about this pyramid of needs. At the bottom is what is NEEDED, like food, water and shelter, then the levels progress to more luxury items such as TVs Radios an Xbox. Once you get to the top of the pyramid you have to invent things to worry about, since we are animals after all, and we are programmed to be worried about something.

I'll give you an example, in 2007, before the financial crisis really set in, organic food was big, it was on the news, there were big signs in supermarkets and all sorts, but as soon as people had financial problems, it was soon abandoned, it's still talked about, but people don't care so much, since they have less money.
Another example is, in 2007 the #1 thing people in Britain worried about was the enviroment, in 2008 it was #13, when people have issues that bother them, they don't care about anything else, but as soon as they're sorted, they find problems to complain about.

Noelveiga:

Eternal_Lament:
snip.

I'm going to defuse your wall of text in a single sentence. Watch closely.

Where I live, 51 women have been killed by husbands, boyfriends or exes so far this year, while no men have died killed by their spouses.

Yeah, talk about "accommodating" to me now.

I'm going to say this: I don't legitimatly believe that when everyone is equal that human cruelty will end. Even when we end up creating and living in a society that is not biased and has equal opportunities and rights for everyone, there will still be people who do not care.

The fact that 51 women have been killed is not indicitive of the male dominance over women, since without the context of WHY they were killed, all that means when 51 women were killed is that 51 women were killed. Without the context as to why they were killed, we can't legitimatly say that these deaths are proof of male superiority (unless of course it has been stated by those who killed their partners that they felt they were better than them and that the partner deserved it BECAUSE their gender allows it)

I have a question.

Why is the burden of proof on the guy saying 'no there isn't' when it comes to racism? Shouldn't you have to prove that something is racist BEFORE you ask someone to prove you wrong?

Further, why are all crimes commited by a superiority (is that the right word?) against a minority hate crimes? Can't it just be over money, like everything else?

-Dragmire-:

Falcon123:

Oh, and is anyone really that excited for Soul Calibur V? I loved the second one, but the fourth one felt like a weak retread and the fifth one looks even worse to me.

I bought SC IV, I played it for a day then went back to SC III(love the strategy-ish campaign is has). The fourth one turned me off so much I've lost interest in all new installments to the series... even if Vader or Spawn or (that guy from Tekken (I think he was from Tekken anyway)) or Link is in it again.

EDIT:

Zachary Amaranth:

Danial:
So lets get this right,

Gay marriage = Destroying innocence
letting someone burn to death in hot lava, decapitating and dismembering people with a lazer sword and the full genocide of a planet to prove a point=Fine.

People are weird...

not to mention the original series, which dates back to the 70s, had a father cutting his kid's hand of, torture, murder with magical powers, gangsters, drug runs, giant space slugs who are horny for Carrie Fischer, a hero who shoots first to handle his debt to said gangsters, bounty hunters, very obvious Nazi analogues, bar fights etc.

But yeah, homosexuality is the death of innocence.

Hey, they "fixed" that, remember? So it's all ok now... well after a few more edits and reselling of said series anyway.

It definitely reminded me of this:
http://satwcomic.com/anything-but-that

omegawyrm:

Father Time:

omegawyrm:

Yeah, some women probably take advantage of their gender to get unfair treatment and that's not fair, but you're going to have to get the hell over it.

Our hero, ladies and gentlemen. Hypocritically defending unfairness against some while telling others to get over it.

omegawyrm:

Men still enjoy far larger amounts of privilege and power than women do. You don't think it's fair that we have to make concessions to a group that's been disenfranchised for all of history until very recently? Too fucking bad! This problem is bigger than you and just because you think women are given equal treatment to men in all of your personal experiences doesn't mean that no one is being discriminated against anywhere. We can concede a whole hell of a lot and still enjoy massive social double standards in our favor that are so ingrained into the cultural psyche that we see them as our rights.

I think you've quoted the wrong person.

Hypocrisy? Saying that you need to get over the little bit of unfairness that is imposed on you to make up for the far larger social unfairness imposed on a group you don't belong to is hypocritical? Damn you must have a self-centered worldview.

No I just think people should be treated equally and I don't think unfairness is justified with "well it makes up for unfair shit you weren't a part of".

If I said "Yeah, some men probably take advantage of their gender to get unfair treatment and that's not fair, but you're going to have to get the hell over it." What would you think of me?

Alterego-X:

sergnb:

James Hobbley:
[quote="Shjade" post="6.313971.12735235"]I still don't understand how or why a My Little Ponies series became this internet phenomenon seemingly overnight. Or over any length of time.

Since I won't watch the show, I probably never will, either. It just seems bizarre to me.

Here's a suggestion if you don't want to watch MLP: It's exactly the same as Powerpuff Girls, but with movie and internet culture references.

Oh, and the most overrated stuff ever made too.

Did you watch EITHER of these shows?

Because PPG had significantly more pop-culture references than MLP.

For one thing, PPG was originally intended to be adult animation, back when it had the working title "The Whoopass Girls", and it was toned DOWN for Cartoon Network.

MLP was always intended to be aimed at 3-8 year olds, until the Internet decided that it is sooo cuuute and fuuuunnny. So far, we didn't see any episode that was written after it became a meme.

Just pointing it out, because it's funny that you fell for the same mistake that Bob accuses lazy execs of, that is, ignorantly believing that if it is popular with nerds, that can only happen because it is secretly full of nerdy jokes.

Yes, I agree. I did a mistake there saying MLP has more references, because that is clearly not the case.

Point is: MLP is the most overrated piece of shit I've ever seen.

We could go all day with privileges either gender has.

But if you want some that women have the first ones that immediately come to mind are

The draft (them reinstating it is still a possibility).

Female pedophile teachers given a much easier time by the media and the public (see South Park).

Lower chance of being the victim of a violent crime
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/vsx2.cfm

In a perfect world I'd be expecting the success of MLP:FiM to usher in more creative freedom to studios since it was the creative freedoms given to the series that made something little girl oriented to actually be good...

... damn this imperfect world, I honestly didn't see this bleak future of girly franchises rebooted to catch the 18 to 25 crowd. Please, I don't want another 90's unless I get more SwatKats.

No wait, knowing most companies today I don't think I'd like the result.

It's only a matter of time though until this Retro Fad starts pulling from the 90s though; we can only really hope for the best.

Eternal_Lament:

Noelveiga:

Eternal_Lament:
snip.

I'm going to defuse your wall of text in a single sentence. Watch closely.

Where I live, 51 women have been killed by husbands, boyfriends or exes so far this year, while no men have died killed by their spouses.

Yeah, talk about "accommodating" to me now.

I'm going to say this: I don't legitimatly believe that when everyone is equal that human cruelty will end. Even when we end up creating and living in a society that is not biased and has equal opportunities and rights for everyone, there will still be people who do not care.

The fact that 51 women have been killed is not indicitive of the male dominance over women, since without the context of WHY they were killed, all that means when 51 women were killed is that 51 women were killed. Without the context as to why they were killed, we can't legitimatly say that these deaths are proof of male superiority (unless of course it has been stated by those who killed their partners that they felt they were better than them and that the partner deserved it BECAUSE their gender allows it)

No, sir, the context is present. These men killed their wives and girlfriends. No women killed their husbands and boyfriends.

That's all the context you need. Some of these men killed them because they wanted to leave them. Some because they were cheating with other people, some because they were depressed.

But the fact remains, they were all men killing the people they professed to love. No women did. It's a large enough statistical trend that it can prove one thing: some men (a small group of men) felt they had power over the life of their partners. No women felt this. That indicates societal male superiority, whether you like it or not. I know it doesn't fit with your worldview, but it's true.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here