Twitch chat comparisons between male and female streamers

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

undeadsuitor:

I never said it was the sole part, it's simply the part I wanted to touch on. Sorry I'm not reaching the goal posts you set for me.

This is how you represented the argument:

"But if women were makeup they're sluts who deserve sexist comments."

So yes, yes you were misrepresenting the argument. I just asked to see if you would be willing to realize your mistake and seek to correct it. Apparently not.

Houseman:

undeadsuitor:

I never said it was the sole part, it's simply the part I wanted to touch on. Sorry I'm not reaching the goal posts you set for me.

This is how you represented the argument:

"But if women were makeup they're sluts who deserve sexist comments."

So yes, yes you were misrepresenting the argument. I just asked to see if you would be willing to realize your mistake and seek to correct it. Apparently not.

How would you represent the argument in the op then?

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

undeadsuitor:

Houseman:

undeadsuitor:

I never said it was the sole part, it's simply the part I wanted to touch on. Sorry I'm not reaching the goal posts you set for me.

This is how you represented the argument:

"But if women were makeup they're sluts who deserve sexist comments."

So yes, yes you were misrepresenting the argument. I just asked to see if you would be willing to realize your mistake and seek to correct it. Apparently not.

How would you represent the argument in the op then?

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

Well, when everyone else is proven wrong and/or evil, you don't have to do much to prove your own case.

Seeing the right wing use that very tactic is ironic to a depressing degree, since it's what disenfranchised so many from the left wing...

undeadsuitor:

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

I know. It drives people mad. They want to criticize whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one. I'm just attempting to point out bad logic and bad rhetoric when I see it

Houseman:

undeadsuitor:

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

I know. It drives people mad. They want to criticize whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one. I'm just attempting to point out bad logic and bad rhetoric when I see it

But how would you represent the op

Houseman:
whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one.

Genuinely curious. Is that because you don't want to have to defend your opinion, or because you can't form one? I mean, there's things I wouldn't necessarily start a conversation with 'My opinion on x is ...', but in most cases if someone said to me 'What do you think about ...', I'd have an opinion, ill-informed or otherwise.

E.g. In this case, I think the idea that women are 'asking for it [abuse]' or whatever because they're in front of a camera (if I'm 100% honest I skimmed the OP because it was really long) foolish and sad. That's my opinion on it, stated. Are you saying you don't have an opinion on it one way or another?

Houseman:

undeadsuitor:

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

I know. It drives people mad. They want to criticize whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one. I'm just attempting to point out bad logic and bad rhetoric when I see it

What a weird stance to hold. 'I have no opinion, I'm just here to have a go at people uselessly'. Never understand the appeal of that, personally. I imagine people get mad at you less because they can't criticize your stance, but more because it's such an utterly inane thing to do that wastes everyones time when it comes to actually holding a discussion about something.

Besides, You know it's entirely possible to criticize the absence of a stance, right? And the attempt to apply your brand of logic to other peoples arguments? Hell I just did it then, by calling it a useless position to take when it comes to arguments, it's really quite easy to criticize not having a stance.

It's an unfortunate truth but although I believe men should be 100% accountable for being creeps, I am kind of on the OP side here. But this is also to do with the nature of streaming.

1) Now it's been awhile since I played multiplayer games a lot, but the existence of male gamers was pretty much ok until a girl stepped in and lots of true colors came out. Nobody can argue about this, guys be fucking sleazy, it makes me facepalm. Now, that might even be less than half the guys in the server, but it's there regardless. So, you kind of know the nature of guys watching the stream, especially one with a attractive-ish girl in it.

2) Girls know this and pander directly to it. It's not just putting on makeup like you're reading the daily weather/news, or even going out with your friends. I watched some of the girls tell the bare truth (sorry) about why they expose themselves that much, get the perfect cleavage and makeup, and spend so much time on this because they know it's what sells. So that's more of a tough break for the girls that *aren't* doing all that, and just want to play/talk games for realz. For the girls who DO do this, with all that effort and suffering, you think they're just doing it for fun, and *not* wanting the attention?

3) I do see a problem, some comments make me queasy as fuck. But not just on girl streamers. Fortunately, I don't watch streamers so it doesn't get under my skin. But anywhere you look, that people can leave comments: youtube, facebook, twitter, insta, the more the girl is showing, the more low down dirty the comments get. Anybody can make this correlation. It's not the girls fault, heck if a girl wants to play video games in her bikini on camera it's her damn well deserved right. But you got to expect more creeps than if you just looked presentable. I wish it were not so, but it is.

CritialGaming:
-snip-

Thanks for posting this, the actual study was a fascinating read. They really put a lot of work in the study, especially ensuring that their male and female streamers had equal viewership
Buuut, I think your putting way too much blame on the women here and not giving chat enough shit for their comments. I'm watching Kaceytron's stream right now and the chat is straight up garbage. If the streamer is really fine with it, like Kaceytron apparently is, then more power to them! I still think it's sad that Twich chat is busting a nut over a little cleavage. She is actually pretty amusing , especially how she reacts to chat, it'd be cool if she were just a regular streamer


It's sad that the popular female streamers are "booby streamers." Also notice the word "warning" shows up for the less popular female streamers and not for the less popular male streamers, which is shitty.

I don't really have any first hand experience though, the only streamer I regularly follow is epicnamebro, and the only times I've watched women stream have been charity events and the chat is usually cool

I wish people would stop telling me that men acting like shit heads is normal, because I find it fucking insulting, as well as utterly unfounded.

erttheking:
I wish people would stop telling me that men acting like shit heads is normal, because I find it fucking insulting, as well as utterly unfounded.

You know what's normal? Theft. Fraud.

We have no issue discussing these problems and how to protect ourselves from them. We don't cry "victim blaming" whenever somebody suggests a way to protect themselves from these things. We don't roll our eyes and wish people will stop saying that theft is normal. Why does it happen here?

Houseman:

erttheking:
I wish people would stop telling me that men acting like shit heads is normal, because I find it fucking insulting, as well as utterly unfounded.

You know what's normal? Theft. Fraud.

Can you clarify: is this a stance you hold (that theft and fraud are normal) or is this an example of you saying you are holding a stance but you aren't really holding a stance?

Houseman:

I don't think you're approaching this in good faith, an no longer wish to discuss this with you.

Mate, until you can be bothered to actually make a rebuttal, counter-argument, or even deign to give your own personal opinion about something instead of just asking questions ad-nauseam, I don't want to discuss this with you either.

So, I suppose y'all have ascertained with due diligence that it is in fact "men" who are making those comments, and are not just assuming things based on your negative preconceptions of this unfashionable minority gender and further perpetuating them?

Personally I would hazard a guess that many of these comments are not made by "men", but rather young boys, by definition not fully socialized, and even physically incapable (ask a neuroscientist) to fully take into account the impact of their behaviour on others. And in that case, they're not exhibiting the arrogance of some special "privilege" granted them by teh Patriarchy or what have you, but rather taking advantage of the anonymity of the medium to enjoy a transgressive thrill of behaving in a manner that would likely result in a swift punishment in a "real world" setting. Because, generally speaking, young boys are hardly treated by society as the strutting Royalty of Feminist legend, more like a perpetual nuisance. Perhaps as a result, they often act the part.

As an illustrative aside, I was on a bus the other day when a bunch of fresh-faced kids who looked about 10 years old got on. They sat down near me and fell into some conversatin', as you do, of course fiddling with their smartphones all the while. And what was the topic of the day? Internet bans. It was all "I was banned. Are you banned? Guess who I saw back from a ban? Oh yeah, they're banned." And it hit me: OMG They are real, and right here: the Phantom Menace, the Alt-Right Misogynist Horde, the Toxic Masculinity. I know I should have alerted the United Nations immediately, but I was incapacitated in the cold grip of terror, literally shaking. So I just got off on my stop and went about my business in a daze.

Point being, surely it would behoove us to consider the more plausible explanations as to the nature of various phenomena before proceeding to grind our axes upon them? Those axes are looking worn halfway to the handle anyway, they don't cut like they used to. So we're all getting the blunt instrument treatment these days.

StatusNil:
So, I suppose y'all have ascertained with due diligence that it is in fact "men" who are making those comments, and are not just assuming things based on your negative preconceptions of this unfashionable minority gender and further perpetuating them?

Personally I would hazard a guess

You can't expect everyone else to engage in due diligence if your best effort is to hazard a guess. Hardly fair.

StatusNil:

Personally I would hazard a guess that many of these comments are not made by "men", but rather young boys, by definition not fully socialized, and even physically incapable (ask a neuroscientist) to fully take into account the impact of their behaviour on others. And in that case, they're not exhibiting the arrogance of some special "privilege" granted them by teh Patriarchy or what have you, but rather taking advantage of the anonymity of the medium to enjoy a transgressive thrill of behaving in a manner that would likely result in a swift punishment in a "real world" setting. Because, generally speaking, young boys are hardly treated by society as the strutting Royalty of Feminist legend, more like a perpetual nuisance. Perhaps as a result, they often act the part.

So how come young girls aren't filling up Twitch streams by guys to request dick pics, ask for sexual favors and call them them ugly names when the guys deny these totally unfettered young girls their wishes?

The answer is socialization. These might not be adult men, but they are on their way there and they are picking up on how they can be expected to behave and what they can do. When a young boy goes onto a streamers twitch and asks her to show her boobs, he does so because he knows that it will not meet resistance and because he knows that it is something that men can ask women, often without repercussions. Contrary to your grim neurocentered explanation, young boy are not incapable of empathy or understanding, even though children might not be as capable as some adults in that regard.

Where exactly do you think these boys, some of them even pre-pubescent, get the idea to ask women to get back in the kitchen? To show their boobs? To tell these women they are whores or that they'd enjoy fucking the streamer? From us. From everyone they ever met in an online game or twitch stream or a gaming forum or someplace else where they met someone who was also a gamer. They have learned that telling a woman "tits or gtfo" is natural, even expected, behavior in a gaming setting.

We can't fault these boys for being young and still maturing. We can't fault them for picking up social cues when engaged in constant socialization with others that share their interests. But we absolutely can fault every single fucking person that ever made a "tits or gtfo"-comment in a game or stream or cracked a "get back in the kitchen"-"joke". We can fault every single person who keeps trotting out the idea that women have to prove that they are real gamers or that good looking women and girls who play video games are actually fake gamer girls or are in it for the attention. We can't fault the boys for picking up on and mirroring the shitty fucking sexism prevalent in gaming.

But I can fault you or anyone else who keeps perpetrating that sexism, either by actively engaging in it or, as you do, by trying to downplay it and diminish the absolute fucking toxicity of it. As the old saying goes: Children don't do what we tell them to, they do what we do. That young boys thinks that this is how you behave online and in the gaming community is a serious indictment against gamers and gamer culture.

Gethsemani:

But I can fault you or anyone else who keeps perpetrating that sexism, either by actively engaging in it or, as you do, by trying to downplay it and diminish the absolute fucking toxicity of it. As the old saying goes: Children don't do what we tell them to, they do what we do. That young boys thinks that this is how you behave online and in the gaming community is a serious indictment against gamers and gamer culture.

OK then. And I suppose I can fault you in turn for perpetuating ideas like that being "socialized into a man" means going "tits of gtfo" all the time and much, much worse. What's a poor young boy to think, that he must act like that or be stripped of his "toxic" gender identity, literally emasculated? Funnily enough, many would choose being a disruptive lout over drastic disfiguration. Thankfully, that's not an actual choice that has to be made.

That young boys think this is how you behave online and in the gaming community is a serious indictment against the dishonest habit of framing childish acting out as the standard of "gamer culture". Yes, kids seek out adult models of behavior. Which is why it's not only wrong but counterproductive to portray something that is no such thing as a legitimate example of it. Assuming you're actually trying to make such behavior less frequent, rather than using what there is of it to further a wider agenda. Which is of course what politicians and profiteers do.

Gethsemani:

So how come young girls aren't filling up Twitch streams by guys to request dick pics, ask for sexual favors and call them them ugly names when the guys deny these totally unfettered young girls their wishes?

Part of the reason is because most females don't even like that kind of thing. Males are drawn by the eyes. Females, not so much. There is much more porn for men than there is for women, and there are much more erotic books for women than there are for men. Males and females are different. Different things arouse us. You do no favors by suggesting that the differences are entirely "man"-made.

StatusNil:

OK then. And I suppose I can fault you in turn for perpetuating ideas like that being "socialized into a man" means going "tits of gtfo" all the time and much, much worse. What's a poor young boy to think, that he must act like that or be stripped of his "toxic" gender identity, literally emasculated? Funnily enough, many would choose being a disruptive lout over drastic disfiguration. Thankfully, that's not an actual choice that has to be made.

That's one of the worst Tu quoque's I've seen, literally. I am making an observation of something that hurts young boys and you want to put the fault on me for making the observation and not the people that actually socialize boys into thinking that toxic behavior is acceptable? Didn't think that one through much, did you?

But I should thank you for once again proving that I was correct in considering you a part of the problem.

Houseman:
Part of the reason is because most females don't even like that kind of thing. Males are drawn by the eyes. Females, not so much. There is much more porn for men than there is for women, and there are much more erotic books for women than there are for men. Males and females are different. Different things arouse us. You do no favors by suggesting that the differences are entirely "man"-made.

I assume you have some serious evidence that the difference in what arouses men and women are by nature and not socialization? Because otherwise you are just telling me what you think. Especially since the number of women watching porn is rising steadily. And most do it for a quick orgasm.

I mean, we could assume that what you wrote is correct. But that would also mean that modern women are somehow breaking away from their own nature. Then, maybe you could also explain how one can fight their own biology like that. Or... we could just agree that what you wrote is a bunch of fallacious sex essentialism bullshit and that all modern research agrees that sexuality is a very socialized thing and that what arouses any particular individual is a complex interaction of nature and nurture.

Houseman:

Gethsemani:

So how come young girls aren't filling up Twitch streams by guys to request dick pics, ask for sexual favors and call them them ugly names when the guys deny these totally unfettered young girls their wishes?

Part of the reason is because most females don't even like that kind of thing. Males are drawn by the eyes. Females, not so much. There is much more porn for men than there is for women, and there are much more erotic books for women than there are for men. Males and females are different. Different things arouse us. You do no favors by suggesting that the differences are entirely "man"-made.

You gonna source those claims?

undeadsuitor:

You gonna source those claims?

Is putting a picture of your butt on The Escapist okay?

Wrex Brogan:

Houseman:

undeadsuitor:

I notice you do more criticising of other peoples opinions than actually providing any of your own.

I know. It drives people mad. They want to criticize whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one. I'm just attempting to point out bad logic and bad rhetoric when I see it

What a weird stance to hold. 'I have no opinion, I'm just here to have a go at people uselessly'. Never understand the appeal of that, personally. I imagine people get mad at you less because they can't criticize your stance, but more because it's such an utterly inane thing to do that wastes everyones time when it comes to actually holding a discussion about something.

Besides, You know it's entirely possible to criticize the absence of a stance, right? And the attempt to apply your brand of logic to other peoples arguments? Hell I just did it then, by calling it a useless position to take when it comes to arguments, it's really quite easy to criticize not having a stance.

I once couldn't decide my stance in one topic and I started a thread about it where I tried to play devil's advocate, giving counter-arguments to all the posts so I could figurate out why they had those opinions and not others about that topic. I did that in an attempt to learn and acquire some insight; but I never considered myself to be a rhetoric arbitrer (that would had defeated the purpose of my thread).

Houseman:

erttheking:
I wish people would stop telling me that men acting like shit heads is normal, because I find it fucking insulting, as well as utterly unfounded.

You know what's normal? Theft. Fraud.

You know what is normal for theft and fraud? They are punished by law. Men acting like shit heads? Not even close. That equivalence doesn't hold water once you compare the consequences for the perpetrators.

Houseman:

We have no issue discussing these problems and how to protect ourselves from them. We don't cry "victim blaming" whenever somebody suggests a way to protect themselves from these things. We don't roll our eyes and wish people will stop saying that theft is normal. Why does it happen here?

We also don't let the thief go and put the robbed on trial for not having adequate protection in our eyes. Our legal system does not hold them at fault.

But apparently it's the girl's fault if people act like jackasses towards her. She shouldn't have dressed like that/wore make up, ect...

Bad analogy, bud.

StatusNil:

And in that case, they're not exhibiting the arrogance of some special "privilege" granted them by teh Patriarchy or what have you, but rather taking advantage of the anonymity of the medium to enjoy a transgressive thrill of behaving in a manner that would likely result in a swift punishment in a "real world" setting.

There was a time I would agree with this, but given the cultural climate now, they would now be held up and praised as heroes of freeze peach.

Because, generally speaking, young boys are hardly treated by society as the strutting Royalty of Feminist legend, more like a perpetual nuisance. Perhaps as a result, they often act the part.

Mileage may vary according to the values of where they are and their social standing.

And it hit me: OMG They are real, and right here: the Phantom Menace, the Alt-Right Misogynist Horde, the Toxic Masculinity. I know I should have alerted the United Nations immediately, but I was incapacitated in the cold grip of terror, literally shaking.

Man, if you got scared by them, then you actually had to talk to people like Matt Forney or Brother Dean, hard right conservative preachers, be present for White Power rallies or witness AMREN meetings and Klan gatherings, you'd die of a heart attack. I can safely say I'm of sterner stuff since I have been in the presence and even engaged people like that and came back intact.

Point being, surely it would behoove us to consider the more plausible explanations as to the nature of various phenomena before proceeding to grind our axes upon them? Those axes are looking worn halfway to the handle anyway, they don't cut like they used to. So we're all getting the blunt instrument treatment these days.

I've never had problems identifying who to keep my axes ready for, don't know about you.

CaitSeith:

You know what is normal for theft and fraud? They are punished by law. Men acting like shit heads? Not even close. That equivalence doesn't hold water once you compare the consequences for the perpetrators.

Well yeah, if you focus exclusively on the differences and ignore the similarities, it seems completely different doesn't it?

Smithnikov:

Bad analogy, bud.

I wasn't making an analogy, I was asking a question. This question remains unanswered.

Gethsemani:

I assume you have some serious evidence that the difference in what arouses men and women are by nature and not socialization?

I only said it was part of the reason. It didn't say it was 100% nature.

You, however, said that the answer is 100% socialization.

So I assume you have some serious evidence that the difference in what arouses men and women are 100% by socialization? Because otherwise you are just telling me what you think.

I mean, we could assume that what you wrote is correct. But that would also mean that modern women are somehow breaking away from their own nature.

Or that a certain gene is becoming more wide-spread.

what arouses any particular individual is a complex interaction of nature and nurture.

Then don't claim that it's 100% socialization when "all modern research" disagrees with you.

StatusNil:

Personally I would hazard a guess that many of these comments are not made by "men", but rather young boys,

https://www.google.se/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=gender%20demographics%20twitch

Houseman:

CaitSeith:

You know what is normal for theft and fraud? They are punished by law. Men acting like shit heads? Not even close. That equivalence doesn't hold water once you compare the consequences for the perpetrators.

Well yeah, if you focus exclusively on the differences and ignore the similarities, it seems completely different doesn't it?

Yeah, but see, we don't say "theft and fraud are normal, so it turns out there's nothing to worry about, it's just human nature".

Smithnikov:

Bad analogy, bud.

I wasn't making an analogy, I was asking a question. This question remains unanswered.

Man, you asked "You know what's normal?" And then you answered it yourself, which makes it a rhetorical question.

You're bad at this.

CaitSeith:

Wrex Brogan:

Houseman:

I know. It drives people mad. They want to criticize whatever stance I hold, but I often don't hold one. I'm just attempting to point out bad logic and bad rhetoric when I see it

What a weird stance to hold. 'I have no opinion, I'm just here to have a go at people uselessly'. Never understand the appeal of that, personally. I imagine people get mad at you less because they can't criticize your stance, but more because it's such an utterly inane thing to do that wastes everyones time when it comes to actually holding a discussion about something.

Besides, You know it's entirely possible to criticize the absence of a stance, right? And the attempt to apply your brand of logic to other peoples arguments? Hell I just did it then, by calling it a useless position to take when it comes to arguments, it's really quite easy to criticize not having a stance.

I once couldn't decide my stance in one topic and I started a thread about it where I tried to play devil's advocate, giving counter-arguments to all the posts so I could figurate out why they had those opinions and not others about that topic. I did that in an attempt to learn and acquire some insight; but I never considered myself to be a rhetoric arbitrer (that would had defeated the purpose of my thread).

There's a world of difference between 'I don't have an opinion, so I'll provide counter-arguments to find my opinion' and 'I don't have an opinion, so I'll uselessly point out what I think is flawed logic while missing the argument entirely' - the first actually contributes to discussion, debating points so that you can come to your own decision more effectively, while the latter... just wastes everyone's time.

*looks at thread* I think it's safe to say which one of those Houseman occupies. The sad thing is pointing out peoples bad logic can actually be beneficial to an argument (and is indeed, the original purpose of the Devils Advocate, someone who pointed out the flaws of an argument to help shore them up for proper debates), but... fuck, you have actually know what you're doing first. Not just read the play-by-play of some First-Year philosophy text book.

Houseman:

I wasn't making an analogy, I was asking a question. This question remains unanswered.

I did answer it. We do not charge or prosecute the homeowner or the robbed. We charge and prosecute the thief. So no, they are not to blame.

Smithnikov:

Houseman:

I wasn't making an analogy, I was asking a question. This question remains unanswered.

I did answer it. We do not charge or prosecute the homeowner or the robbed. We charge and prosecute the thief. So no, they are not to blame.

It depends. Entrapment is a legal concept, though I don't think this applies here. I did a quick google image search of male and female twitch streamers.

Females tended to be wearing low-cut shirts, or shirtless, and have cameras angled to highlight the cleavage.

Males tended to wear normal shirts/jackets, with camera angles that focused on the face.

So are the females that engage in highlighting their sexual characteristics in order to gain an edge really victims when people focus on said characteristics?

Or is this a case of jumping into a tiger pit wearing a meat suit?

proxyhostlawl:

Smithnikov:

Houseman:

I wasn't making an analogy, I was asking a question. This question remains unanswered.

I did answer it. We do not charge or prosecute the homeowner or the robbed. We charge and prosecute the thief. So no, they are not to blame.

It depends. Entrapment is a legal concept, though I don't think this applies here. I did a quick google image search of male and female twitch streamers.

Females tended to be wearing low-cut shirts, or shirtless, and have cameras angled to highlight the cleavage.

Males tended to wear normal shirts/jackets, with camera angles that focused on the face.

So are the females that engage in highlighting their sexual characteristics in order to gain an edge really victims when people focus on said characteristics?

Or is this a case of jumping into a tiger pit wearing a meat suit?

That is maybe not the best comparison. A low cut top is not meat, and men aren't tigers. (They are much smarter, even if equally as hairy.) Also if anyone jumped into the tiger cage, wearing whatever, we would so kill the tigers.

nomotog:

proxyhostlawl:

Smithnikov:

I did answer it. We do not charge or prosecute the homeowner or the robbed. We charge and prosecute the thief. So no, they are not to blame.

It depends. Entrapment is a legal concept, though I don't think this applies here. I did a quick google image search of male and female twitch streamers.

Females tended to be wearing low-cut shirts, or shirtless, and have cameras angled to highlight the cleavage.

Males tended to wear normal shirts/jackets, with camera angles that focused on the face.

So are the females that engage in highlighting their sexual characteristics in order to gain an edge really victims when people focus on said characteristics?

Or is this a case of jumping into a tiger pit wearing a meat suit?

That is maybe not the best comparison. A low cut top is not meat, and men aren't tigers. (They are much smarter, even if equally as hairy.) Also if anyone jumped into the tiger cage, wearing whatever, we would so kill the tigers.

Dicks out for Tigger?

To better explain what I am getting at here. I haved watch a few streams hosted/run/done by females. The ones who focus on the game/content tend not have the focus on their tits/ass/underwear tend to have a chat more focus on the game/content. Where as the ones who focus on tits/ass have chats that do the same. Though there was one notable expectation. A female streamer did a let's play of LoL while having a vibe going to town on her. Nice two camera set-up. No nudity just moans. Most of the chat was focused on how badly she played support Annie. No idea why I brought that up.

Back to my point here. To steal a phrase commonly used by our moral guardians, "Freedom to do action does not protect from consequences of said action." At least I think its how it goes. Proxy-ville has no need of moral guardians so my memory is hazey of those times...

proxyhostlawl:

nomotog:

proxyhostlawl:

It depends. Entrapment is a legal concept, though I don't think this applies here. I did a quick google image search of male and female twitch streamers.

Females tended to be wearing low-cut shirts, or shirtless, and have cameras angled to highlight the cleavage.

Males tended to wear normal shirts/jackets, with camera angles that focused on the face.

So are the females that engage in highlighting their sexual characteristics in order to gain an edge really victims when people focus on said characteristics?

Or is this a case of jumping into a tiger pit wearing a meat suit?

That is maybe not the best comparison. A low cut top is not meat, and men aren't tigers. (They are much smarter, even if equally as hairy.) Also if anyone jumped into the tiger cage, wearing whatever, we would so kill the tigers.

Dicks out for Tigger?

To better explain what I am getting at here. I haved watch a few streams hosted/run/done by females. The ones who focus on the game/content tend not have the focus on their tits/ass/underwear tend to have a chat more focus on the game/content. Where as the ones who focus on tits/ass have chats that do the same. Though there was one notable expectation. A female streamer did a let's play of LoL while having a vibe going to town on her. Nice two camera set-up. No nudity just moans. Most of the chat was focused on how badly she played support Annie. No idea why I brought that up.

Back to my point here. To steal a phrase commonly used by our moral guardians, "Freedom to do action does not protect from consequences of said action." At least I think its how it goes. Proxy-ville has no need of moral guardians so my memory is hazey of those times...

Ah, yes, but Freedom of action does not welcome sexual harassment. Just 'cause someone's showin' off their titties doesn't give you a free pass to be an asshole in chat and make 'em uncomfortable by being a creep. Hell, I know of many a porn streamer or camgirl who complains about sexual harassment or creepers despite the sexual nature of their streams - there's a limit to what is acceptable, and it's key to remember that these people streaming are still people, even if the camera is firmly wedged betwix their breasts. Have some manners, be polite and don't be a creepy asshole just 'cause you're jerkin' your gherkin, god dammit.

Wrex Brogan:

proxyhostlawl:

nomotog:

That is maybe not the best comparison. A low cut top is not meat, and men aren't tigers. (They are much smarter, even if equally as hairy.) Also if anyone jumped into the tiger cage, wearing whatever, we would so kill the tigers.

Dicks out for Tigger?

To better explain what I am getting at here. I haved watch a few streams hosted/run/done by females. The ones who focus on the game/content tend not have the focus on their tits/ass/underwear tend to have a chat more focus on the game/content. Where as the ones who focus on tits/ass have chats that do the same. Though there was one notable expectation. A female streamer did a let's play of LoL while having a vibe going to town on her. Nice two camera set-up. No nudity just moans. Most of the chat was focused on how badly she played support Annie. No idea why I brought that up.

Back to my point here. To steal a phrase commonly used by our moral guardians, "Freedom to do action does not protect from consequences of said action." At least I think its how it goes. Proxy-ville has no need of moral guardians so my memory is hazey of those times...

Ah, yes, but Freedom of action does not welcome sexual harassment. Just 'cause someone's showin' off their titties doesn't give you a free pass to be an asshole in chat and make 'em uncomfortable by being a creep. Hell, I know of many a porn streamer or camgirl who complains about sexual harassment or creepers despite the sexual nature of their streams - there's a limit to what is acceptable, and it's key to remember that these people streaming are still people, even if the camera is firmly wedged betwix their breasts. Have some manners, be polite and don't be a creepy asshole just 'cause you're jerkin' your gherkin, god dammit.

But how can I sustain my manliness if I do not tell every woman I masturbate to that I did so and that I want to know where her house is so I can see her poop? There's a clear cause and effect here, see titties, ask to see poop. This is just the way the world is.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked