The Big Picture: Junk Drawer: Reloaded

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

James Hobbley:

Shjade:
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.

I think you've hit the nail straight on the head there. You really won't get the show unless you've watched it. Even if you don't be come a 'brony' you will understand the whole concept it's based upon.

So......... i suggest you just try and watch a few minutes of MLP just to see what it's about. One 22 minute episode is more than enough to get the gist of the show. At least that way you'll know what everyone's talking about.

I was thinking similarly the other day, deciding I should at least give it some time to try to make an impression on me.

The impression it made: my pre-watch assumptions were 100% accurate. It's an entirely unremarkable show - not bad, but nothing about it that's notable either. Average animation, predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation. At least the voice acting wasn't obnoxious - if it were I wouldn't have been able to sit through an entire episode - but "not obnoxious" isn't exactly an attractive descriptor for a source of entertainment.

I'm as puzzled by the show's popularity now as I was before watching it.

I feel that feminism cheapens equality and spits in the face of men who stand up for and believe in feminism. At first it was a noble and much needed movement, but it's turned in to "how many double standards can we make acceptable in sociality and rights we can take away from men.".

Feminist are so fucking cowardly, they don't say shit about religious oppression, if it offends Islam then they leave it. they'd rather pick faults with movies and video games, than do something that could actual help someone.

If a mother and father was to split up, the father has lot less rights when it comes to whether he sees his own kids. No one seems to care, it's sickening.

If a man was being abused by a women in the street, everyone thinks "he had it coming" or "stop being pathetic".
If a women was being abused by a men in the street, everyone thinks "what fucking scum" and may proceed to intervene.
Case and point --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKgwczruOSQ&feature=related
atrocities can be done against men but not women. Could you imagine if a man was to cut off a women's clitoris and tits, would that convocation be the same?

There is no reason for male circumcision to be legal but female is completely out of bounds.

Stop treating those who have a problem with feminism as people to be disregard because of some assumption that they don't know the history. The good of yesterday doesn't justify the bad of today.

Shjade:

James Hobbley:

Shjade:
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.

I think you've hit the nail straight on the head there. You really won't get the show unless you've watched it. Even if you don't be come a 'brony' you will understand the whole concept it's based upon.

So......... i suggest you just try and watch a few minutes of MLP just to see what it's about. One 22 minute episode is more than enough to get the gist of the show. At least that way you'll know what everyone's talking about.

I was thinking similarly the other day, deciding I should at least give it some time to try to make an impression on me.

The impression it made: my pre-watch assumptions were 100% accurate. It's an entirely unremarkable show - not bad, but nothing about it that's notable either. Average animation, predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation. At least the voice acting wasn't obnoxious - if it were I wouldn't have been able to sit through an entire episode - but "not obnoxious" isn't exactly an attractive descriptor for a source of entertainment.

I'm as puzzled by the show's popularity now as I was before watching it.

I think, one notable unique element that you glossed over, (maybe because you personally don't care about that as a value, that would also explain why you didn't turn into a brony) is it's innocence, and a lack of ironic cynicism.

Almost everything that is made for older kids, and with adult fans in mind, (like SpongeBob, Chowder, etc.), is trying to be "hip", so it includes a huge dose of parody elements, with traditional morals getting spoofed, "friendship is lame, idealism is lame, every other story is lame because they take things seriously, you are lame, oh, look, how cool we are." Even in animated movies, every poster has the "Dreamworks Face", sending the message of how cynical and ironic the show is, compared to the older, straight fairy tales and likes.

Ironically, MLP's charm is in how un-ironic it is. In that show, friendship IS magic, ponies are nice to each other, every episode has a honest moral... AND it's not even obnoxious!

Even if there were other shows for very young kids, that were cute, and friendly, they were all the epitome of obnixiousness (Teletubbies, Barney, etc). So, apparently there grew such a huge demand for innocent, kind shows, that respect adult sensibilities, that MLP could grab it all by the virtue of NOT being a lazily made suckfest of stupidity.

Noelveiga:

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.

No, I don't own the word. But I'm not the one "misusing" it: society is. And words are only what society makes of them. There is no longer any need for the traditional meaning of "feminism" (like I said, the belief that women should be treated equally is now the norm, and it is much more efficient to label who believe otherwise), so it has assumed, or is in the process of assuming, the new usage given to it by society.

"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?"
They have already attained equal treatment and civil rights. If they continue to press for better treatment or more rights exclusively for themselves, then they are bigots. Prejudice is no longer a societal thing. It is only present at the level of individuals.

Please try to be more flexible.

Alterego-X:

Shjade:
It's an entirely unremarkable show - not bad, but nothing about it that's notable either. Average animation, predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation.

I think, one notable unique element that you glossed over, (maybe because you personally don't care about that as a value, that would also explain why you didn't turn into a brony) is it's innocence, and a lack of ironic cynicism.

I don't think I glossed over it. It's right there: predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation.

It's innocent and lacks depth. That's pretty much the definition of "aimed at younger age groups" on average, and anyone above that target demographic (assuming average intelligence/life experience) could likely tell you how any episode is going to run just by watching the first two to three minutes, minus specific details (ex: little ponies giving their volunteer babysitter a hard time until she saves them from whatever trouble they get themselves into, minus the specific detail of cockatrice appearance).

It's not bad. I just don't understand why it's popular above, say, mid-teens at the oldest. There's no substance. If it were ironic popularity it'd make more sense.

internetzealot1:

Noelveiga:

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.

No, I don't own the word. But I'm not the one "misusing" it: society is. And words are only what society makes of them. There is no longer any need for the traditional meaning of "feminism" (like I said, the belief that women should be treated equally is now the norm, and it is much more efficient to label who believe otherwise), so it has assumed, or is in the process of assuming, the new usage given to it by society.

"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?"
They have already attained equal treatment and civil rights. If they continue to press for better treatment or more rights exclusively for themselves, then they are bigots. Prejudice is no longer a societal thing. It is only present at the level of individuals.

Please try to be more flexible.

But that's not what feminists want. Not the bulk of them, anyway. And prejudice not being societal is just... either wishful thinking or self delusion, really.

That's the core of the issue, I just can't accept your presumptions. They're wrong. They're self-serving and irresponsible. Women aren't treated equally in many ways. Neither are racial minorities or homosexuals.

Also, I'm not sure you're in a position to give permission to other societal groups to complain or not. Parsing your "theys", you're a white heterosexual male. So am I, for the record. We have been the one single unoppressed group in the western world for the last 200 years. If you're upper class, make that 400, and if you descend from nobility, that's about 2000. I'd say we should think fucking hard before we tell racial minorities, women or other groups that their four decades of fighting for equality have expired and they should shut up and go back to work.

Noelveiga:

internetzealot1:

Noelveiga:

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.

No, I don't own the word. But I'm not the one "misusing" it: society is. And words are only what society makes of them. There is no longer any need for the traditional meaning of "feminism" (like I said, the belief that women should be treated equally is now the norm, and it is much more efficient to label who believe otherwise), so it has assumed, or is in the process of assuming, the new usage given to it by society.

"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?"
They have already attained equal treatment and civil rights. If they continue to press for better treatment or more rights exclusively for themselves, then they are bigots. Prejudice is no longer a societal thing. It is only present at the level of individuals.

Please try to be more flexible.

But that's not what feminists want.
You're not talking about feminists. You're talking about normal people

And prejudice not being societal is just... either wishful thinking or self delusion, really.
If I stand on a street corner with a sign that says "White Power" or "Go back to the kitchen, women", society will condemn me. Prejudice may still exist, but it exists as fragments in individuals and fringe groups, not as the unified will of the people it once was

That's the core of the issue, I just can't accept your presumptions. They're wrong. They're self-serving and irresponsible.
lolwut
Women aren't treated equally in many ways. Neither are racial minorities or homosexuals.
Once again, in fragmented instances. Also, there are ways in which men are treated worse than women.

Also, I'm not sure you're in a position to give permission to other societal groups to complain or not. Parsing your "theys", you're a white heterosexual male. So am I, for the record. We have been the one single unoppressed group in the western world for the last 200 years. If you're upper class, make that 400, and if you descend from nobility, that's about 2000. I'd say we should think fucking hard before we tell racial minorities, women or other groups that their four decades of fighting for equality have expired and they should shut up and go back to work.

Please don't use this argument. Its totally invalid. White heterosexual men of today are not responsible for injustices committed by white heterosexual men in the past. Even though it seems to be a universal assumption

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?

Er, vita isn't an English word, it's Italian. Or Latin, as in the case of the "veetah" we borrowed for "Vytalitee".

Sacré bleu! The English speaking world sometimes appreciates other languages?

Generic Gamer:

Sylocat:
I don't care about the attractiveness of the male leads, or how they run around in next to nothing. I'm bisexual, so of course I like that, but I think anyone seriously that worked up is just fucking insecure.

Of course, what does trouble me about Twilight is its portrayal of the Edward/Bella RELATIONSHIP as anything but creepy...

Thing is that it's fictional entertainment based on what a lot of women find fun in a fantasy. It's not designed to be used as a basis for a real relationship, take it from a guy who has read more than a few female erotic novels, they are almost never representative of a healthy relationship or any relationship a woman would want. Women on the whole are not so stupid as to confuse an idle daydream with a workable plan.

I don't know about that last part. The whole have a career and family and handle it on your own ideal was anything BUT workable but a lot of woman bought into it. It should be pointed out that the feminist movement hurt itself by letting extreme radicals run amok without saying anything. When by silence you give the impression that you are wound up over trivialities like changing policeman to policeperson the movement as a whole suffers.

internetzealot1:

But that's not what feminists want.
You're not talking about feminists. You're talking about normal people

No, I am not. Again, you wanting it doesn't make it true. You appropriating the word doesn't make it yours. You can define "feminist" as "some uppity bitch who wants to oppress men" and "normal people" as "somebody who wants equal treatment for everybody", but for better or for worse, that's not how that works. You're redefining the words there, either by mistake or maliciously. That's why we disagree.

And prejudice not being societal is just... either wishful thinking or self delusion, really.
If I stand on a street corner with a sign that says "White Power" or "Go back to the kitchen, women", society will condemn me. Prejudice may still exist, but it exists as fragments in individuals and fringe groups, not as the unified will of the people it once was

Then again, that's not the only form of discrimination. By that standard there aren't any bad people left in the planet just because the act of twirling moustaches is out of fashion.

Telling jokes about women and kitchens might be less frequent than it once was (although it's still out there), but passing women on for jobs they can do is frequent, societally having less women in positions of power despite having them show better academic performance than men is a thing, sexual abuse exists, domestic abuse exists, double standards in many areas persist... Equal treatment doesn't stop in allowing women to vote.

That's the core of the issue, I just can't accept your presumptions. They're wrong. They're self-serving and irresponsible.
lolwut
Women aren't treated equally in many ways. Neither are racial minorities or homosexuals.
Once again, in fragmented instances. Also, there are ways in which men are treated worse than women.

Bullshit. There are ways in which self-entitled men who won't take ownership of the faults of their priviledged treatment will see any help to women as a personal attack. I have never, ever, been treated worse than a woman for being a man, with the sole exception of once being denied a room in a shared apartment during college because the conservative parent of one of the girls sharing it wouldn't have a man living there with his daughter. And I'm pretty sure that doesn't count as sexism.

Also, I'm not sure you're in a position to give permission to other societal groups to complain or not. Parsing your "theys", you're a white heterosexual male. So am I, for the record. We have been the one single unoppressed group in the western world for the last 200 years. If you're upper class, make that 400, and if you descend from nobility, that's about 2000. I'd say we should think fucking hard before we tell racial minorities, women or other groups that their four decades of fighting for equality have expired and they should shut up and go back to work.

Please don't use this argument. Its totally invalid. White heterosexual men of today are not responsible for injustices committed by white heterosexual men in the past. Even though it seems to be a universal assumption

Ah, the rub. Lying therein.

You are not personally to blame for hundreds of years of discrimination. You, however, benefit from them every day. You've had it easier to go to school, get a job (but I get the feeling you still are in the "going to school" part?), get a promotion, not be assumed to have sucked any dicks to get said promotion, statistically have a higher chance of better treatment in the family unit, avoid unpleasant situations and hostile treatment from a number of sources and many, many, MANY other little advantages you obviously don't acknowledge.

I know because I get them. And I've seen others not get them in front of me.

Quoting Louie C.K., if being a white man was an option I'd re-up every year. Is it your fault? Nope. Did you ask for it? Nope. Have you had it easier because of it? Shit, yeah. You might find it unfair to have your achievements diminished by it, but you don't get to stand here and claim that discrimination is magically over because Hillary Clinton and Obama exist so you want all that money that went into equality policies back.

Okay, gonna tackle these as they're presented.

Game Scores - A lot of Gears of War: the newest one, was shown here but I wouldn't know how the fan/critic reaction has been to it since it and everything associated with it is a non entity to me. But I saw the same reaction to the Warhammer 40K: Space Marine game. Some folks made some valid points that it is comparable to some other games in it's same genre and that outside of it's setting it doesn't bring much to the table. And a lot of fellow 40K fans flipped their collective god damned wigs about it. A 7/10 score is pretty damned solid and were the boots on my feet it's probably the score I'd have given it. Don't get me wrong, I love the game because I'm a fan of the source material but there's nothing to be gained from blindly refusing to admit that the game mechanics themselves aren't anything to write home about. They're functional and solid but not perfect.

Sony Memory Cards - I love Sony I do. For three generations of home console they have managed to deliver the most stable system and most diverse library of games. But their handhelds suck dong and whenever one comes out I have to genuinely wonder who it was made for. Did anyone buy anything media beyond games on UMD? Did you ever really use that weird streaming radio service that it came with?

LGBT Jedi - I don't know how much of the game is going to be dedicated to pursuing a romantic relationship but I'm fairly certain that it won't be much of it. If current MMO's are of any indication your child's innocence will be completely ravaged by the random racist and generally hostile general or trade chat LONG before they happen to encounter a Jedi or Sith who might be a little light in the Lightsaber.

Soul Calibur/Twilight oogling - I agree, fair is fair and the "idealization of the human form" is and always will be a part of fantasy fiction. With that being said I'm still gonna bitch about Twilight for twisting the knife into the corpse of Vampire mythology that Anne Rice and Poppy Z. Bright already murdered.

Feminism - If I may be allowed to paraphrase "Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings too." As long as we're all in agreement that equality works for both good and ill then I'm all for it.

Employers - Myep. Suncoast, Starship Theatres, Carmike Cinemas and Hollywood Video. I am the destroyer of worlds.

Racism in games - This is a WAY bigger can of worms than I want to get into here and now. Short response is similar to the Feminism one above. I know in previous installments it's been a point that the whole "slavery" thing gives folks a free pass on this issue. To me, we're reaching a point where the majority of folks in America have probably never owned any human beings as property nor have they been owned. I think it's getting to be time to put that particular argument to rest.

Lord knows nobody ever gave me a small pox infected blanket or stole any of MY land. Paleface not speak to me with fork tongue for many moons.

"chick cartoons" - Hey, as long as they get some developers with the Animation Predigree of Lauren Faust I'll have no room to complain.
But yeah, my hopes ain't high on that one.

Oh Bob, we agree on oh so much... <3

Shjade:

Alterego-X:

Shjade:
It's an entirely unremarkable show - not bad, but nothing about it that's notable either. Average animation, predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation.

I think, one notable unique element that you glossed over, (maybe because you personally don't care about that as a value, that would also explain why you didn't turn into a brony) is it's innocence, and a lack of ironic cynicism.

I don't think I glossed over it. It's right there: predictable characters and episode arcs, aimed at younger age groups, devoid of intellectual stimulation.

I still say that you did. What you describe here, is not the DEFINITION of innocence, just one particular , (negative) aspect of it. While it's clear that it's a matter of different tastes for you and bronies, and you won't suddenly go "OMG, I see now, so that's why MLP is awesome!", I'm still trying to explain, for the sake of clarity.

Think about this analogy: Why do people like children? They aren't even that clever, or strong. We, as humans, admire those values, but when it comes to children, we can look at them with an entirely different set of values.

It's not even just "lowering the standards", or "tolerating them". If you live close to young kids, you might notice, that in certain situations, you would genuinely rather spend some time with them, than with "deep and intellectual" adults, because that "cute, innocent, and simple" attitude is a value on it's own right.

As long as you are thinking from the standpoint that people would only ever watch shows for their twists, and intellectual content, I guess you won't even understand what bronies are talking about. "I'm watching it because it's so charmingly innocent" just sounds to you like a synonym of "I'm watching it because it's so charmingly dumb", if you ignore all the positive associations of the word, so that sounds like "watching it ironically".

It's a bit like the assumption that some people have, that just because history films, or Hard Sci-Fi, are expected to be "realistic", realism is ALWAYS a goal, every unrealistic element in every story is a failure to be realistic, therefore fantastic stories are inherently failed works. (while in fact, they aren't even trying, but they function on entirely different values of quality, than others.)

Diddy_Mao:

Feminism - If I may be allowed to paraphrase "Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings too."

I hate that stupid phrase.

If that really was what feminism is all about we'd all be feminists. No feminism means more than that. It has a philosophy and ideals. That phrase is a cheap attempt to pretend feminism is something else when it comes under fire. It's cowardly.

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.

yes.
IV wasnt great.
V looks much better!

id love to debate specific points about the game, but i dont think this is the place.

Father Time:

Anyway I should point out that I love Soul Calibur, it's one of my favorite fighting franchises (not for the women but for the gameplay).

i wish more people would see this view. its a great game, i dont see why everything is reduced to what it looks like.

Also, dont forget that this game has had robust character creation for its last two games, and confirmed in the next.
You dont have to pay attention to these characters, even whilst playing it.

personally, Natsu's voice, ugly costume and terrible hair could mean that i would never use what appears an incredibly fun style to use... Character creation means that i will.

...also:
image
...its not to the same scale, but its not localised to the females in this series.

I think it's because of insecurity people take offense when a video game doesn't get a 10 out of 10. They think they need the reviews to justify to everyone else that they just got is a good game.

y is gear of war so popular and highly rated? i give it 7.5 coz cover shooting is good when you use stealth and tactics and this doesnt which makes it bland and repetative but fun enough to pick up from the bargain bin and waste some time on.

I think Movie Bob has a bit of tunnel vision. He uses terms like "people keep" and "gamers keep", but he's recounting personal experiences and presenting them as widespread epidemics. I'd be curious to know who exactly these people he's referring to are, because it sort of sounds like he's attributing the characteristics of some forum he visits to society as a whole.

Alterego-X:
It's not even just "lowering the standards", or "tolerating them". If you live close to young kids, you might notice, that in certain situations, you would genuinely rather spend some time with them, than with "deep and intellectual" adults, because that "cute, innocent, and simple" attitude is a value on it's own right.

As long as you are thinking from the standpoint that people would only ever watch shows for their twists, and intellectual content, I guess you won't even understand what bronies are talking about. "I'm watching it because it's so charmingly innocent" just sounds to you like a synonym of "I'm watching it because it's so charmingly dumb", if you ignore all the positive associations of the word, so that sounds like "watching it ironically".

It's a bit like the assumption that some people have, that just because history films, or Hard Sci-Fi, are expected to be "realistic", realism is ALWAYS a goal, every unrealistic element in every story is a failure to be realistic, therefore fantastic stories are inherently failed works. (while in fact, they aren't even trying, but they function on entirely different values of quality, than others.)

I think you're misunderstanding (related: don't put words in my mouth - or, rather, in my post). I don't recall ever saying it was dumb, or that standards were lowered, or similarly insulting things. I said it was not intellectually stimulating, and you apparently agree with me: it's cute, innocent, and simple. That doesn't make it dumb. It just makes it what it is: uncomplicated. Easy. Shallow, if you want to give what I'm saying a more negative connotation (which it seems that you do, so I may as well make it easier for you and get that out of the way).

I'm not saying a show about magical ponies should be on par with philosophical texts addressing questions of existence. I'm saying the show bored me because I saw literally nothing new, surprising, or even interesting in it. It was the same story I've seen in I don't know how many kids' cartoons before; it just happened to feature ponies for characters. Oh, and some of them had wings.

Sidenotes:

1 - "Bronies?" Really? It's like you're trying to make it hard to take you seriously.

2 - I don't recall having heard "I'm watching it because it's so charmingly innocent" as a reason any of the folks I talk to on a regular basis watch the show. They just say they like it/it's a good show, which is what puzzles me.

I don't get the whole Sex Calibur "controversy." I don't care that I can play as women who dress like dominatrices, Japanese prostitutes, or angry mall rats. My lady friends who play Soul Calibur don't care about the shirtless Elvis/Bruce Lee, scarred samurai, or beefy barbarians. We both play because "Luk I has weaponz!"

And as far as Twilight goes, best marketing ploy evar. There's a Scene It:Twilight that only covers the first movie. How much fraking trivia can you get from only one 2-hour movie?!

Father Time:
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?

I'd say that you were missing the point and those two statements are not equivalent at all and I'd think that you're the kind of person who ignores facts.

Eternal_Lament:

snip

Look, I actually did read your whole post, but I'm really regretting picking this fight at this point. I'm not saying that the women who go on about the "rape culture" and say that all men are secretly rapists are correct. I don't buy into that either. All I'm saying is that it's not too much to ask for men to conduct themselves socially in a sensitive manner towards women, acknowledging that they have a very real historical reason to be wary of threats to their rights and well-being. If you already treat everyone equally you're most of the way there already and are probably not doing anything to set back equality at all. But it's also important to avoid the subtler types of discrimination that are hard to see if you're not a member of the minority group. If you really don't believe those subtler types of discrimination exist, I seriously doubt there's anything I can say that will convince you. I'm really not going to make the effort of hunting down a bunch of statistics to win this argument.

omegawyrm:

Father Time:
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?

I'd say that you were missing the point and those two statements are not equivalent at all and I'd think that you're the kind of person who ignores facts.

Let me guess it's not as bad to be unfair towards men because they have privilege or something.

Or perhaps we have a different definition of unfair.

Noelveiga:

snip

Your responses are so much more eloquent and witty than mine. I feel like I'm never able to keep my frustration or anger from totally tanking my ability to defend something in a convincing way.

Father Time:

omegawyrm:

Father Time:
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?

I'd say that you were missing the point and those two statements are not equivalent at all and I'd think that you're the kind of person who ignores facts.

Let me guess it's not as bad to be unfair towards men because they have privilege or something.

Or perhaps we have a different definition of unfair.

Yes! That's exactly what I'm saying! The little bits of unfairness you might be asked to tolerate in your daily life are not a big deal!

Noelveiga:

internetzealot1:

But that's not what feminists want.
You're not talking about feminists. You're talking about normal people

No, I am not. Again, you wanting it doesn't make it true. You appropriating the word doesn't make it yours. You can define "feminist" as "some uppity bitch who wants to oppress men" and "normal people" as "somebody who wants equal treatment for everybody", but for better or for worse, that's not how that works. You're redefining the words there, either by mistake or maliciously. That's why we disagree.

And prejudice not being societal is just... either wishful thinking or self delusion, really.
If I stand on a street corner with a sign that says "White Power" or "Go back to the kitchen, women", society will condemn me. Prejudice may still exist, but it exists as fragments in individuals and fringe groups, not as the unified will of the people it once was

Then again, that's not the only form of discrimination. By that standard there aren't any bad people left in the planet just because the act of twirling moustaches is out of fashion.

Telling jokes about women and kitchens might be less frequent than it once was (although it's still out there), but passing women on for jobs they can do is frequent, societally having less women in positions of power despite having them show better academic performance than men is a thing, sexual abuse exists, domestic abuse exists, double standards in many areas persist... Equal treatment doesn't stop in allowing women to vote.

That's the core of the issue, I just can't accept your presumptions. They're wrong. They're self-serving and irresponsible.
lolwut
Women aren't treated equally in many ways. Neither are racial minorities or homosexuals.
Once again, in fragmented instances. Also, there are ways in which men are treated worse than women.

Bullshit. There are ways in which self-entitled men who won't take ownership of the faults of their priviledged treatment will see any help to women as a personal attack. I have never, ever, been treated worse than a woman for being a man, with the sole exception of once being denied a room in a shared apartment during college because the conservative parent of one of the girls sharing it wouldn't have a man living there with his daughter. And I'm pretty sure that doesn't count as sexism.

Also, I'm not sure you're in a position to give permission to other societal groups to complain or not. Parsing your "theys", you're a white heterosexual male. So am I, for the record. We have been the one single unoppressed group in the western world for the last 200 years. If you're upper class, make that 400, and if you descend from nobility, that's about 2000. I'd say we should think fucking hard before we tell racial minorities, women or other groups that their four decades of fighting for equality have expired and they should shut up and go back to work.

Please don't use this argument. Its totally invalid. White heterosexual men of today are not responsible for injustices committed by white heterosexual men in the past. Even though it seems to be a universal assumption

Ah, the rub. Lying therein.

You are not personally to blame for hundreds of years of discrimination. You, however, benefit from them every day. You've had it easier to go to school, get a job (but I get the feeling you still are in the "going to school" part?), get a promotion, not be assumed to have sucked any dicks to get said promotion, statistically have a higher chance of better treatment in the family unit, avoid unpleasant situations and hostile treatment from a number of sources and many, many, MANY other little advantages you obviously don't acknowledge.

I know because I get them. And I've seen others not get them in front of me.

Quoting Louie C.K., if being a white man was an option I'd re-up every year. Is it your fault? Nope. Did you ask for it? Nope. Have you had it easier because of it? Shit, yeah. You might find it unfair to have your achievements diminished by it, but you don't get to stand here and claim that discrimination is magically over because Hillary Clinton and Obama exist so you want all that money that went into equality policies back.

i think his point about the twilight hunks runs something like this - the following picture is A-ok by male gamers.
Samus in a sexy pose

but if we switch it around...

master Chief in a sexy Pose

the picture is now an eye burning affront their physically hurt to have seen.

The point is, whats good for the goose, is good for the gander. if guys get scantily clad girls to ogle in their entertainment, so should the girls get scantilly clad males, and you don't get the right to be offended by bare chested hunks.

I pretty much got up and cheered at the bit about feminism.

[And I'm a guy.]

Noelveiga:

internetzealot1:

But that's not what feminists want.
You're not talking about feminists. You're talking about normal people

No, I am not. Again, you wanting it doesn't make it true. You appropriating the word doesn't make it yours. You can define "feminist" as "some uppity bitch who wants to oppress men" and "normal people" as "somebody who wants equal treatment for everybody", but for better or for worse, that's not how that works. You're redefining the words there, either by mistake or maliciously. That's why we disagree.

So by your logic, most people today are regularly exhibiting unacceptable levels prejudice? Something tells me that's an egregious overstatement.

Also, let me stress again that I'm not the ones redefining the words. They're being redefined by their change in usage.

And prejudice not being societal is just... either wishful thinking or self delusion, really.

If I stand on a street corner with a sign that says "White Power" or "Go back to the kitchen, women", society will condemn me. Prejudice may still exist, but it exists as fragments in individuals and fringe groups, not as the unified will of the people it once was

Then again, that's not the only form of discrimination. By that standard there aren't any bad people left in the planet just because the act of twirling moustaches is out of fashion.

The point was not that a lack of people openly acting discriminatory is indicative of a lack of prejudice, but that prejudice, when it can be identified, is almost universally scorned. Also, contrary to popular belief, there is no empirical evidence supporting the claim that mustache-twirling is a sign of being "bad."

Telling jokes about women and kitchens might be less frequent than it once was (although it's still out there), but passing women on for jobs they can do is frequent,

I doubt that very much evidence can be supplied to justify the assumption that women being withheld jobs exclusively on the basis of gender is common. The likeliness that this assumption is true is further reduced by the fact that there are laws in place to prevent it (the difficulty in enforcing these laws works in their favor. Any woman who is denied a job can make the claim that it was on the basis of gender, and even with little evidence it is still possible for her to win in court).

societally having less women in positions of power despite having them show better academic performance than men is a thing,

Academic performance is not the only factor in success.

sexual abuse exists, domestic abuse exists, double standards in many areas persist...

On both sides, all of those. And are you assuming that sexual and domestic abuse are only committed by men? I have no doubt that most reported cases are, but, and let me be real for a second, how many men are going to call the cops when their wife starts hitting them.

Equal treatment doesn't stop in allowing women to vote.

No. It stops when society as a whole agrees that women deserve to be treated equally. And society does

That's the core of the issue, I just can't accept your presumptions. They're wrong. They're self-serving and irresponsible.
lolwut
Women aren't treated equally in many ways. Neither are racial minorities or homosexuals.
Once again, in fragmented instances. Also, there are ways in which men are treated worse than women.

Bullshit.

Men pay higher rates for car insurance
Women have an easier time getting into college, due to the numerous scholarships available exclusively for women
Its a societal agreement that men must pay for a woman's food if they are dating
Its a societal agreement that men cannot hit women, although men hitting women is generally tolerated (this relates to your claim about abuse earlier)

The first two assertions are fact. You can dispute the other two, but if you choose to do so this will quickly into a "No its not" type of argument

Also, I'm not sure you're in a position to give permission to other societal groups to complain or not. Parsing your "theys", you're a white heterosexual male. So am I, for the record. We have been the one single unoppressed group in the western world for the last 200 years. If you're upper class, make that 400, and if you descend from nobility, that's about 2000. I'd say we should think fucking hard before we tell racial minorities, women or other groups that their four decades of fighting for equality have expired and they should shut up and go back to work.

Please don't use this argument. Its totally invalid. White heterosexual men of today are not responsible for injustices committed by white heterosexual men in the past. Even though it seems to be a universal assumption

Ah, the rub. Lying therein.

You are not personally to blame for hundreds of years of discrimination. You, however, benefit from them every day.

I am also harmed by discrimination every day, as stated above

You've had it easier to go to school,

Untrue, see above

get a job...get a promotion,

Though perhaps statistically true, there is nothing to support, or reason to support that women's genders being detrimental to their careers is widespread

(but I get the feeling you still are in the "going to school" part?)

OH GOD A PERSONAL ATTACK MY POINTS ARE INVALID.

not be assumed to have sucked any dicks to get said promotion,

You cannot expect me to believe that this is one of the world's great societal issues

statistically have a higher chance of better treatment in the family unit,

...Define "better." And then tell me how recent these statistics are. And then provide me with a source, because that claim seems vague and based on data that could easily be skewed.

avoid unpleasant situations and hostile treatment from a number of sources and many,

That's too vague to warrant a response.

many, MANY other little advantages you obviously don't acknowledge.

As there are disadvantages which you have failed to acknowledge

I know because I get them. And I've seen others not get them in front of me.

Lucky you. I can't think of anything that would give me the right to say the same.

Have you had it easier because of it? Shit, yeah.

...perhaps in some regards. As I have had it more difficult in some regards (though both are negligible).

You might find it unfair to have your achievements diminished by it,

Is that what this is about? My achievements don't count because I'm white. I don't think that way. Do YOU think that way?

but you don't get to stand here and claim that discrimination is magically over because Hillary Clinton and Obama exist so you want all that money that went into equality policies back.

This is not about taxpayer money being spent on equality problems (though at this point its as much of a waste as the Selective Service).

internetzealot1:

Noelveiga:

No, I am not. Again, you wanting it doesn't make it true. You appropriating the word doesn't make it yours. You can define "feminist" as "some uppity bitch who wants to oppress men" and "normal people" as "somebody who wants equal treatment for everybody", but for better or for worse, that's not how that works. You're redefining the words there, either by mistake or maliciously. That's why we disagree.

So by your logic, most people today are regularly exhibiting unacceptable levels prejudice? Something tells me that's an egregious overstatement.

Also, let me stress again that I'm not the ones redefining the words. They're being redefined by their change in usage.

You're the one making that statement. You're the... only... one making that statement. Whatever your justification for the change in meaning, it's YOUR justification.

Also, I don't follow the logic you claim I'm following. I'm leaving my original quote in there because I don't get how it leads to your representation of it. By my logic there are plenty of situations where people aren't treated equally, which is not the same as having most individuals maliciously and actively discriminate. Like I said before, that's not the litmus test. People can get discriminated because the situation or society at large sets a double standard. There is no need for men to actively send women to the kitchen for women to have it harder to, say, have the same access to a political position, which is undeniably harder for them.

I doubt that very much evidence can be supplied to justify the assumption that women being withheld jobs exclusively on the basis of gender is common. The likeliness that this assumption is true is further reduced by the fact that there are laws in place to prevent it (the difficulty in enforcing these laws works in their favor. Any woman who is denied a job can make the claim that it was on the basis of gender, and even with little evidence it is still possible for her to win in court).

societally having less women in positions of power despite having them show better academic performance than men is a thing,

Academic performance is not the only factor in success.

Ah... there you are.

I was wondering when sexist you would make an appearance.

So it's on women. The fact that they are less frequently CEOs, high ranking politicians, upper management, scientists... it's not that the power structures and networking that usher people into those positions are fundamentally built around male-dominated elements.

It's that women don't work for it hard enough despite having it basically handed to them.

But hey, thanks for making my point for me. You don't need to come out and slap a woman in the butt to generate and enforce discrimination. It can be more insidious than that. Ecce homo.

sexual abuse exists, domestic abuse exists, double standards in many areas persist...

On both sides, all of those. And are you assuming that sexual and domestic abuse are only committed by men? I have no doubt that most reported cases are, but, and let me be real for a second, how many men are going to call the cops when their wife starts hitting them.

And again, bullshit. Fucking bullshit. Like I told you before, so far this year? 50 women killed by their partners in my country. 0 men. You can't deny that. It's fact. It shows that abuse goes massively one way. Murders don't require victims to actively call the police, they can't be hidden out of shame. You are forcing the numbers for the sake of sexism, generating a false reality on purpose.

Which I appreciate, because it exposes you on the other areas of your claims that are equally false but more popular, like that whole crap about women having it easier on the workplace because "laws help them more".

Once again, in fragmented instances. Also, there are ways in which men are treated worse than women.

Oh, come on. No they're not.

Men pay higher rates for car insurance

Men crash cars more often. That's not discrimination, it's reality. Women not being elected officials is discriminatory because there is no statistical trend confirming that they're less effective at it. Counting the number of accidents when men and women drive is easier.

Women have an easier time getting into college, due to the numerous scholarships available exclusively for women

I don't know of a single scholarship only for women, but I won't deny that they exist if you say so. That's not discriminatory against men, though, especially if the mythical scholarships are meant to compensate a trend of women not being able to access certain degrees.

Its a societal agreement that men must pay for a woman's food if they are dating

Not discrimination, not a disadvantage of being a man, not even really true, definitely not a big deal and I also pick up the bill if I'm out with a male friend unless we've agreed to pay separately. It's called common courtesy.

Its a societal agreement that men cannot hit women, although men hitting women is generally tolerated (this relates to your claim about abuse earlier)

Bullshit. Women are only "tolerated" to hit men in that flirty "aw shucks" way that doesn't involve punching you in the gut while you're pregnant. Women are dying out of domestic abuse, men are getting the occasional hard-on when a woman slaps them in the shoulder as an excuse to get some physical contact.

Don't go that way. You're pissing me off and making yourself look like a twat. Friendly advice.

(but I get the feeling you still are in the "going to school" part?)

OH GOD A PERSONAL ATTACK MY POINTS ARE INVALID.

I was... not aware that going to school was so offensive. It does explain a lot that you see it that way, though.

Tell you what, here's a real personal attack to give your joke a leg to stand on:

You come across as a self-entitled whiny bitch that won't man the fuck up and accept that he has it better than other people. And yes, you do come across as a teenage asshole being stupid, irresponsible and thinking you know everything because you can rationalize being a little shitstain in your head as being rebellious and seeing the world for what it is. You can't and you don't and you should learn some humility before the world teaches it to you by breaking you in half.

There, use that one to complain about how my arguments are being damaged by using ad hominems. It will get you tons of Internet points.

...Define "better." And then tell me how recent these statistics are. And then provide me with a source, because that claim seems vague and based on data that could easily be skewed.

Yes, please hold your blanket statements to scientific levels of validation while I throw blanket statements back at you because obviously only your worldview requires having been proved by an article in Sociology Magazine Monthly.

Look, when I mention some realities and you mention others what that means is that we are reading different newspapers, you and I. Debate club protip: you gain nothing telling me to prove my shit, and you risk me doing so. Unless you can disprove it yourself, don't ask me for a source. It's lazy, 4chan-ish and it only reads like "your argument disproves me, so I will outright deny it unless you can categorically demonstrate it".

As there are disadvantages which you have failed to acknowledge

Yes, that pervasive "being expected to pay for this delicious pizza" double standard... which is mildly sexist in that it presumes the man provides for the woman because she can't work and earn her own money. It makes me so angry and miserable that I wish I had a vagina.

Lucky you. I can't think of anything that would give me the right to say the same.

So how many men and how many women were up for your last promotion? Has any of the other pretenders to a job ever told you when you both lost a job to a woman that she got the job because she was hot? Has anybody ever told *her* that? See, all joking about ad-hominems aside, I wasn't trying to make you look worse personally before with that "going to school" bit. I was just saying that I've seen a ton of this shit in the workplace because I've been in the workplace for quite a few years now in a few companies and with a few different people, so I've seen what it looks like when people are consciously sexist, when people are accidentally sexist and what it looks like when people aren't sexist at all.

Sexism exists.

It doesn't happen to men.

Deal with it.

Noelveiga:
[quote="internetzealot1" post="6.313971.12755261"][quote="Noelveiga" post="6.313971.12747662"]
-snip-

Um... what? Sexism against men does exist. Since you need evidence to a level I will give you my own personal experiences. When I worked as a Lab tech for a botanist, she was paying me 8 dollars an hour. Not too bad, but pretty low for lab work. I then talked to my three coworkers (Who were female) and were hired around the same time that I was, and they were being paid 13 dollars an hour. The professor was female mind you. So, I asked her why my pay was so low.

Her response: " Well, it's just that women can process the equations, and processes easier than men can. Women are more efficient doing the scientific process to what we're doing. I'll be having them analyzing the data, and looking for results. While men are good for...well... manual labor. You'll be prepping our materials and carrying them from the truck to the field. You have wide shoulders, your arms seem detailed and developed enough for heavy lifting and you have a strong back. So....that's why you're paid a tiny bit less."

How is that not sexist? I was paid less because of my gender and body size. Despite that my GPA at the time was 3.5 while their GPA's were from 2.40-2.90. Not convincing enough? Here's another one.

When I was arguing with a friend who was spreading inappropriate rumors about me on campus (She was in fact having fun with it), and how a situation had nothing to do with her and asking if she may please stay out of it, someone who worked security detail came over. Which is fine, it's a public argument. Problem being, this person came over, she looked at her and asked "Are you okay? Is he bothering you? Threatening you?" Granted, I'm 6'1 and broad of a guy, however I wasn't scowling or yelling.

I asked her "Um...what about me? What if I were in distress?" She turns to me and says "You? You're a big enough -guy- that you can take care of yourself? She's defenseless. Why are you picking on her?"

Not sexist enough? Here's another one.

I was attacked by a homeless woman who was yelling and I asked her if she was alright. Instead of responding in coherence, she threw a beer bottle at me and it rolled off my shoulder on contact. She came towards me, I reacted by giving her a solid strike to the gut and knocking the wind out of her and ending the conflict. When I called the police and waited at the area. Almost immediately did they suggest I put my hands up and step away from her.

They walked towards her and helped her up and began accusing my of beating on a woman randomly. Until a lady who came across and helped clear up the situation, they were dead set on arresting me. I asked why did they think I would lie, they suggested "Well... some guys think they're big because they can knock out a little woman. It's not the other way around."

Not enough? Here's my last example.

I was told directly by a manager at a video store that I was not hired for the job because "You don't have breasts." She was dead serious. That women can show off a little cleavage at the job, suggest to men to buy more than they want while they are distracted by their breasts.

No sexism against men you say?

Well for starters, the issue with the gay romances talked about in "The Old Republic Online" are not just a matter of saying that gay people exist, but to actively portray relationships between them, with the player put into the role of one of the participants in that relationship. Even if you do not pursue it, you doubtlessly, in true Bioware fashion, have to deal with the homosexual interest pining after your character constantly to give you the option to pursue it if you choose to pick it up at a later time.

Like it or not, there IS a differance in degree. What's more, like it or not, homosexuals of either flavor are a pretty tiny minority of people, demanding representation in everything given the actual numbers or claiming "neglect of this huge group" isn't paticularly fair or accurate.

My overall attitudes about homosexuality aside (I'm sure there are some messages archived far back in the forums if your paticularly interested), one has to understand that Star Wars has been increasingly directed at children. Jar Jar Binks, The Ewoks, various Cartoons, there is no way around that, Star Wars fans constantly complain about it. We're not talking young teens, but pre-sexual children which is something else entirely.

Unless Bioware actually intends to hire a group of people to engage in draconian enforcement of the game's ratings by hunting down and banning kids based on age, then I don't think this is a good idea. A "T" rating means nothing if the rating isn't going to be enforced, and overall I don't think I've ever seen an MMO enforce ratings before as even ones with an "M" rating have plenty of people opently claiming to be below the allowed age, as well as massive changes on the active server populations cooresponding to the US school schedule. Arguably this kind of neglect is exactly why we had cases about ratings and how seriously they are taken brought before The Supreme Court.

-

As far as Feminism goes, it's a political movement that has long since outlived it's usefulness, it's largely based around power in trying to keep people organized into voting blocks by keeping long dead issues alive. Just like racial battles, this one is long over, it's about fitting into society and taking advantage of the oppertunities presented. With feminists it's now gone from "we should have the right to vote, own property, and hold jobs" to things like "well, special rules should be made so employers can't take actual gender differances into account". This involving things like lowering the physical entrance requirements into jobs, ignoring pregnancies officially while making special allowances for them, and other assorted things. Right now women are not prevented from doing jobs assuming they meet the requirements, some women do, but the ones that don't oftentimes use feminism as a rallying cry to say that men have loaded the deck when really, the requirements exist for a reason. Police Officers for example have to run so fast, jump so high, and be able to lift/carry so much for very good reasons, cops have a hard time with those requirements, and lowering them for women just means more less effective cops on the force. A female officer that can't defend herself, chase a suspect, or help carry/handle a bound suspect safely is
a liability, if she CAN do those things it's not a problem, but when you lower the standards you hurt everyone. That's just one example I bring up because it's been a paticular battleground due to the authority of the police, and one that continues despite there being plenty of women in Law Enforcement (some of which honestly don't belong there, having benefitted from lowered requirements, but that's another story). The point here is that Feminism (the pursuit of empowerment and increased dominance of women in society) is by no means a positive thing. People who complain about it,typically have their reasons. Where once Feminism was a good thing, that time is past, and as time goes on the undeniable benefits and victories of that movement become further in the past, most of what feminists are accomplishing or pushing for are increasingly dubious... while there are exceptions to every rule, the negative perception has not come about for no reason.

-

When it comes to the point about physical ideals in video games and other fantasy media, you (Moviebob) do make a fair point here at least, and one I've pointed out myself.

A point to consider here though is that this kind of advertising has existed in the mainstream for a long period of time. I mean, there are plenty of romances, dramas, chick flicks and other things that have featured sexed up portrayals of the male lead. Guys like Richard Gere, Tom Cruise, and others have made a career out of it. This is to say nothing of that old ad with that "Lucky" guy drinking a Diet Pepsi (I think that was his stage name), I beleive he even wound up in bit parts on shows like "Wings" that were popular at the time because he had become such a male sex icon.

The problem isn't that we have these beefy guys in posters it's that bugging people, it's that it's tacky and attached to a third or fourth rate product that has someone managed to catapult into a major success by being in the right place at the right time.

People knocking Twilight is more a reflection of the franchise, than the style of promotion, which is why this is getting attention where other ad campaigns haven't. It's sort of like how even guys will inflict some major "lulz" on the sex symbols attached to crappy products. The differance between say Lara Croft and any one of a jillion other sexy female protaganists, many of which were made fun of, is that Lara was from a series of games that was pretty bloody good originally, and manages to hold on just enough to earn a lot of second chances. The same can be said of say "Soul Calibur" or "Dead Or Alive" and their female cast (and let's be honest, those games provide plenty of male cheesecake as well, with lots of beefy men walking around in outlandish outfits or bare chested... men have got Cammy and Chun Li, Lei Fang and Helena, women have Ken and Vega, Bayman and Ryu, and others. It's just we don't bother think about guys like Guile walking around with biceps bigger than their head since people pay more attention to the female models, without really looking at the full picture and how certain other characters seem to be being received).

The point here is that Twilight is not getting crap for using Cheesecake in it's avertising, or that men are not used to guys being presented sexually for the benefit of women, we see it all the time, so much that we're blind to it. The problem with Twilight is that it's really bad cheesecake, attached to a crap product, that people can't get away from. It's like the equivilent of the video game "Cat Fight"... which was another all female fighter (for the PC) that went nowhere, because despite all pretensions hot female characters can't carry a game that isn't good to begin with (they can just extend a franchise). "Twilight" and it's marketing is like if somehow that game had become a smash sensation due to timing instead, and was omni-present, and you couldn't get away from it.

-

As far as the whole "My Little Pony" thing goes, your probably right. Sadly I doubt they will take the banned "Strawberry Shortcake" and more recent "Rainbow Bright" ideas from Penny Arcade as actual pitches for televised relaunches. :)

Ramzal:

Noelveiga:
[quote="internetzealot1" post="6.313971.12755261"][quote="Noelveiga" post="6.313971.12747662"]
-snip-

snip

Dude, you punched a hobo lady? That's harsh.

Anyway, your examples are terrible, exception made of getting paid less based on prejudice, which is pretty lame. I don't really think there's sexism involved in people assuming the big guy is posing the physical threat to the two women (one of which had been punched in the gut by the guy, mind you) and your video store example is actually pretty sexist... towards women. The fact that you just happened to not be hired for the job doesn't make the reasoning behind it less demeaning to the girls being hired to show some cleavage. I'd say that last one is just screwed up... but it's a pretty darn huge stretch to extrapolate some form of discrimination against men out of it.

For the record, you're also amazingly unlucky, apparently. Let me scour my own memories to find similar examples.

Let's see... never punched hobo ladies, so no luck there... There's that one time the scared conservative dad wouldn't let me share a flat with his daughter lest I impregnate her by sharing a kitchen... aaaaand... coming up empty here...

...

Nope, nothing.

Not even in friends of mine. Or friends of friends. I think one of them once got turned down for a lingerie store job he had applied to half jokingly. But no, nothing else.

If that doesn't come through, what I'm saying here is "don't extrapolate anecdotal experience". And also "you're reading your own opinions on the subject in unrelated situations". Which, to be fair, might be how you get cops and security so keen on arresting you every now and then. Also, come to think of it, genuine question, how the hell did you attract security by "asking her to stay out of it without scowling or yelling"? Bad vibes?

I don't make fun of the Twilight actors because they constantly take off their shirts. I make fun of them because they are bad actors.

crazeekamikazee:
I feel that feminism cheapens equality and spits in the face of men who stand up for and believe in feminism. At first it was a noble and much needed movement, but it's turned in to "how many double standards can we make acceptable in sociality and rights we can take away from men.".

Feminist are so fucking cowardly, they don't say shit about religious oppression, if it offends Islam then they leave it. they'd rather pick faults with movies and video games, than do something that could actual help someone.

If a mother and father was to split up, the father has lot less rights when it comes to whether he sees his own kids. No one seems to care, it's sickening.

If a man was being abused by a women in the street, everyone thinks "he had it coming" or "stop being pathetic".
If a women was being abused by a men in the street, everyone thinks "what fucking scum" and may proceed to intervene.
Case and point --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKgwczruOSQ&feature=related
atrocities can be done against men but not women. Could you imagine if a man was to cut off a women's clitoris and tits, would that convocation be the same?

There is no reason for male circumcision to be legal but female is completely out of bounds.

Stop treating those who have a problem with feminism as people to be disregard because of some assumption that they don't know the history. The good of yesterday doesn't justify the bad of today.

Agreed, my main problem with Bob and other bleeding hearts isn't their positions; they're entitled to their opinions. It's the fact that they condescend to everyone who disagrees with them by treating them as a bunch of irrational and historically ignorant morons. If anything, their refusal to see the other side of the argument is evidence of their own irrationality.

The civil rights movement was just that: a movement for CIVIL RIGHTS, i.e. rights given to people by the government. When those rights were given the movement was over. What we have now is a movement to change cultural values, which is very different. Most feminist or racial movements that exist today work by using social pressures; e.g. they threaten to boycott something they don't like. Forgive me for being cynical, but I think most of them are basically in it to sell books by appealing to people's hatred or feelings of injustice. They're doing the exact opposite of what they should be doing.

Look at the NAACP's attacks on the confederate flag. It's a flag and this is America, so people can fly it if they want. Furthermore it's a part of American history. People's ancestors fought and died for it (and 90% of them were poor people who didn't own slaves), attacking it is an act of cultural warfare, plain and simple. It sells books by worsening race relations. The south didn't just lose the war, it was economically decimated and never recovered. The only people that you can get away with making fun of these days are southerners. Everyone constantly makes fun of them for being uneducated and poor, as if they chose to be that way. It's easy to make fun of someone for being uneducated once you've burnt down their schools. It's kind of like Himler making fun of the Jews in his camps for being anorexic.

Noelveiga:

Ramzal:

Noelveiga:

Dude, you punched a hobo lady? That's harsh.

Yes. Yes it is. However, I don't like being attacked. Namely by people throwing an object at me. One that could have seriously injured me. And honestly, that was me -not- being sexist or looking down on women. If you are a woman and you a brave enough to attack someone with a weapon, you a brave enough to receive retaliation. I take no glee in the fact that I had to hit someone in a situation like that.

However, I have a right to defend myself against anyone, age, sex, and race disregarded.

Anyway, your examples are terrible, exception made of getting paid less based on prejudice, which is pretty lame. I don't really think there's sexism involved in people assuming the big guy is posing the physical threat to the two women (one of which had been punched in the gut by the guy, mind you)

How is that not sexist? They assumed I was in the wrong because I was a man. And yes, I did hit her. It was a quick and easy way to end a conflict without stretching it out and risking anyone being seriously hurt. What if she had a knife and I were going to try and restrain her? I could have been maimed or killed for the sake of stupid Draconian honor system that never really existed.

Again, if I did anything else, I could have been hurt/killed and she could have gotten a worse punishment than being put in jail for a time. Like her going to prison. If anything, the opposite decision is underestimating the opposite sex just because---*GASP*---It's a woman! That would have been sexist. A punch to the stomach only bugs you for about an hour. A stab to the chest is either months of pain or seconds of it depending on the outcome.

and your video store example is actually pretty sexist... towards women. The fact that you just happened to not be hired for the job doesn't make the reasoning behind it less demeaning to the girls being hired to show some cleavage. I'd say that last one is just screwed up... but it's a pretty darn huge stretch to extrapolate some form of discrimination against men out of it.

Yeah, it was sexist towards women. And men too. If a woman came to a job and asked to be hired and she was basically told "No, because you're not a man" it'd be sexist. But because I'm a man, it's not sexist. Wow. Nice double standard you got there. That's one point for equality there.

For the record, you're also amazingly unlucky, apparently. Let me scour my own memories to find similar examples.

Let's see... never punched hobo ladies, so no luck there... There's that one time the scared conservative dad wouldn't let me share a flat with his daughter lest I impregnate her by sharing a kitchen... aaaaand... coming up empty here...

...

Nope, nothing.

Not even in friends of mine. Or friends of friends. I think one of them once got turned down for a lingerie store job he had applied to half jokingly. But no, nothing else.

Different experiences for people who live in different areas, cultures, and lives. I've never went out on a date with a fashion model, but I wouldn't try to discredit someone because I never have. That was pretty rude of you.

[quote] If that doesn't come through, what I'm saying here is "don't extrapolate anecdotal experience". And also "you're reading your own opinions on the subject in unrelated situations". Which, to be fair, might be how you get cops and security so keen on arresting you every now and then.

Now it's my turn to be rude back. Those were two situations, jerk. You make it sound as if it's common and turn the experience back at me as a weapon in an attempt to discredit. Which is a tactic worthy of a politician. It's clear your goal is not to listen or educate. Or even bring a different opinion or point of view but rather to shut down any opinion that is not lined with yours. That's regrettably narrow minded. :/

In both my examples, I was not aggressive.

[quote] Also, come to think of it, genuine question, how the hell did you attract security by "asking her to stay out of it without scowling or yelling"? Bad vibes?

Mainly because she was yelling at me. After I asked her to calm down several times. I don't mean to sound like "That guy" but I'll risk it anyways. I've heard tones like yours before. If you are female (Strong probability here) you lean more towards the opinion that women are inherently weaker than men in every way possible and need to either be defended at all times by other women or a knight in shining armor.

An outlook like that has got to be the most discrediting of all -to- women. You're making a mistake that Movie Bob is constantly making without meaning to. Coming to the defense of something that point frankly doesn't even need defending. Or asked for it for that matter. I've heard of no major african american movements against Deus Ex's character. You know why?

Because there are african americans who talk that way. So, how can something be racist when the race itself projects it self in a similar way. Furthermore, how can something be sexist when it shows no actual insult towards women in general? Seriously, how is this a sexist portrayal of how women are nothing more than sex objects.

image

When there's this:

image

And how can people say that this character is an inaccurate portrayal of how some african american's speak or carry themselves:

image

When you've got this?

image

I swear, it's like screaming "FIRE!" when there isn't one.

I'd really -really- love Movie Bob to respond to anything that I've put down in this thread.

Ramzal:

Yes. Yes it is. However, I don't like being attacked. Namely by people throwing an object at me. One that could have seriously injured me. And honestly, that was me -not- being sexist or looking down on women. If you are a woman and you a brave enough to attack someone with a weapon, you a brave enough to receive retaliation. I take no glee in the fact that I had to hit someone in a situation like that.

However, I have a right to defend myself against anyone, age, sex, and race disregarded.

Eh... your response is a bit of a mess and really hard to read, but I'll do my best to parse it.

About this? See, I have a problem with it, but it's not about sexism.

I have somehow managed to never be in a violent situation like this in my life by commanding the wonderful power of the "walking away from this shit". That's not to say that people can't find themselves being attacked through no fault of their own and forced to fight for their lives, but... let's just say that it seems to be the large guys who can handle themselves who seem to be forced to heroically fight for their lives more often.

Also, you don't get to come across as a paragon of feminism because you didn't hesitate to punch a woman. But still, not my problem. My problem is with the punching. Unless the lady had a machine gun that can shoot beer bottles.

How is that not sexist? They assumed I was in the wrong because I was a man. And yes, I did hit her. It was a quick and easy way to end a conflict without stretching it out and risking anyone being seriously hurt. What if she had a knife and I were going to try and restrain her? I could have been maimed or killed for the sake of stupid Draconian honor system that never really existed.

Again, if I did anything else, I could have been hurt/killed and she could have gotten a worse punishment than being put in jail for a time. Like her going to prison. If anything, the opposite decision is underestimating the opposite sex just because---*GASP*---It's a woman! That would have been sexist. A punch to the stomach only bugs you for about an hour. A stab to the chest is either months of pain or seconds of it depending on the outcome.

Look, same deal. I wasn't there. I don't know what happened, but I've told you how I'd have reacted based on your account, and my reaction has nothing to do with sexism. Regarding that angle, no I don't think it's sexist for a cop to first target the big guy in a fight, regardless of the gender of the little guy.

Yeah, it was sexist towards women. And men too. If a woman came to a job and asked to be hired and she was basically told "No, because you're not a man" it'd be sexist. But because I'm a man, it's not sexist. Wow. Nice double standard you got there. That's one point for equality there.

See, here's the deal.

Equality is not about treating everybody in exactly the same way.

Equality is about the right to be as different as you want to be without having anybody give you shit about it.

It's a bit of a logical stretch to claim that making a sexist ad using a woman in a bikini to sell, say, soda, is sexist against men as well because some male model didn't get the job to use his pecs to peddle soda. It just... doesn't work. Just like punching a lady you could have restrained doesn't work as a victory for equality.

Different experiences for people who live in different areas, cultures, and lives. I've never went out on a date with a fashion model, but I wouldn't try to discredit someone because I never have. That was pretty rude of you.

No, what? Wait. I'm not discrediting your experience because it hasn't happened to me. I'm saying that your experience isn't representative of society at large based in that one lab manager lady that was sexist to you (because your other examples are a bit of a stretch). I'm *specifically* giving you credit and not questioning the veracity of your experience. I'm simply warning against extrapolating it to other areas, cultures and lives.

Now it's my turn to be rude back. Those were two situations, jerk. You make it sound as if it's common and turn the experience back at me as a weapon in an attempt to discredit. Which is a tactic worthy of a politician. It's clear your goal is not to listen or educate. Or even bring a different opinion or point of view but rather to shut down any opinion that is not lined with yours. That's regrettably narrow minded. :/

Again, what the fuck? I am doing the exact opposite of that. You were the one that took my statement, which was a generalization about society "women suffer sexism, men don't" and presented your personal, unique, isolated experiences as proof that I was wrong.

And now I'm guilty of... what? I've only treated those as specific instances of stuff as far as sexism goes.

And yes, I admit that was me stretching what I consider likely because, like I said above, I am immediately wary of people who tell me that attacking somebody in retaliation was the best way to handle a violent situation, but that's neither here nor there. It doesn't relate to our discussion happening here, it's an unrelated side note from me about this one particular example from your private life that you used when talking about something else.

Mainly because she was yelling at me. After I asked her to calm down several times. I don't mean to sound like "That guy" but I'll risk it anyways. I've heard tones like yours before. If you are female (Strong probability here) you lean more towards the opinion that women are inherently weaker than men in every way possible and need to either be defended at all times by other women or a knight in shining armor.

I'm decidedly male.

Again, unrelated to the whole sexism angle? Walking away from shit. Does wonders for the whole "not getting cops involved into situations" thing.

And again, not related to sexism, I think anyone needs to be defended by people whose job is to defend people. I don't think anybody should ever have to defend themselves in a world with police in it. But that has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

An outlook like that has got to be the most discrediting of all -to- women. You're making a mistake that Movie Bob is constantly making without meaning to. Coming to the defense of something that point frankly doesn't even need defending. Or asked for it for that matter. I've heard of no major african american movements against Deus Ex's character. You know why?

Hello, leap of logic.

No, that's not it. This is me not taking the bullshit that because most of society nominally frowns upon sexism, sexism is gone. That is not true. That is the kind of shit that self-entitled males use to shield themselves from guilt, if not to shield their own innate sexism from the same frowning upon the claim has done away with sexism in the first place.

That is very specifically, very accurately, what I'm doing here. Nothing else.

Seriously, how is this a sexist portrayal of how women are nothing more than sex objects.

When there's this:

And how can people say that this character is an inaccurate portrayal of how some african american's speak or carry themselves:

When you've got this?

I swear, it's like screaming "FIRE!" when there isn't one.

Wait, Dom is a racist stereotype now? I have never heard that. As in, ever. If anything, he's been called out as the opposite, what with being more emotionally developed and level-headed than Marcus in the first place. That one you just made up.

********************
EDIT: Just noticed that you didn't post a pic of Dom, but of Cole. Soo... disregard that. I'm not a fan of Gears and I've only played through the first game, which I didn't really like, so I can't really judge how that guy is portrayed at all or whether or not there is any accusation of racist against how he's portrayed. I know I haven't heard it from any coverage of the games I've read, but hey, I'm not combing through forums looking for Gears info, so who knows...

EDIT 2: Hey, I looked the character up. Apparently, he's based on the guy who plays him. As in, recognizably so.

http://gearsofwar.wikia.com/wiki/Lester_Speight

I don't think he gets that many accusations of racism, either. But still, I know nothing about it other than my 30 second Google search, so...
*******************

I think you have things confused here about why people complain about sexism. See, it's not that Ivy is fighting people wearing a bathing suit with holes in it and high heels. It's that the male characters in that game dress like this:

image

See, he's shirtless, but not sexualized. His outfit is a stylization of real gear from the time period and it looks cool, but it's not impractical for the sake of showing his butt crack.

I don't even care about Ivy, by the way. I don't think playing Soul Calibur is a sexist act, and I don't think Ivy's design is harmful to women, but I see where people who do think that are coming from.

My personal opinion is that Ivy is a stupid design. It's immature. It's assuming I get aroused by a woman with tits overflowing from a ridiculous tiny outfit while whipping men and making fake dominatrix poses.

Frankly, it's insulting to me, not to real women. And more than a bit uncomfortable if you're tyring to explain to people how games are this artful, interesting experience that people should try more often.

 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