Since when is it bigoted for a guy to announce that he likes attractive women? Gay pride activists have whole fucking parades devoted to their preferences, and are always announcing it to the world.
No. they are expressions of frustration... or troll posts, or perhaps both. People need to realize that this shit should not be taken seriously. I think most still know this (the SJWs definitely do), but they' feel compelled to hop on the bandwagon so as not to avoid shaming from their peers. Those quotes are not representative of the whole of gamergate supporters. I am sure you know this as well. In contrast, what is being criticized BY gamergate represents the implications of the feminist party line.
They've done a lot more than just bitch. So far, they've managed to get a bunch of advertisers to pull their ads from media outlets who want to use the veneer of journalism to push their political propaganda. Not a bad first step at all. I wish advertisers would do this with the mainstream media. The fact that big companies have chosen to do this speaks quite a bit about the integrity of the gamergate position, considering how sensitive corps are about feminism and 'diversity.' The fact they've listened at all suggests there are many many more gamers out there who aren't the ones who posted whatever posts you're referring to.
Changing? It might be, but criticism of specific change is not hatred of all change. Again, this is another fallacious argument used by the SJW camp, or really, the same one they use to justify labeling all gamers as misogynists. Personally, I don't care if women play games or not. It's their choice to do so or not. However, I will not support the stifling of creativity by perpetually offended tumblr types demanding their narratives be included, in any media. They're free to make their own games. The irony is that the SJW camp tried to shutdown the FYC, a feminist group trying to get women into game design, in order to drive the donations to their own competing event, speaks volumes about their lack of integrity. Who came to the defense of the FYCs and raised a shitton of money for them? 4chan. Figure that one out.
That 50% stat takes casual players into account. The reason that's relevant is that part of this fiasco revolved around the corrupt sites posting of 'gamers are dead' articles that tried to equate the enthusiast 'core' with the casual who wants an 'i-can-win' QTE driven interactive movie, and then paint them as a 'misogynist minority'. Yet more fallacious reasoning. There are plenty of people who drive their toyotas to work every day, but they are not car enthusiasts who spend their spare time and change on an automotive hobby and race on weekends. (there's the requisite car analogy). There's a reason car manufacturers bother to cater to these people even though more people buy corollas.
Vitriol? Maybe a little. but it is based in truth and it is not passive aggressive. It's a bit actively aggressive. You don't see me crying about being 'oppressed' or 'victimized' by your post. What analysis are you talking about? You went straight to the ad hominems. My post existing or not existing has no bearing on anyone's ability to tell me I'm wrong. If anything, it gives them an opportunity. Your own posts prove that, albeit poorly.
I suggest you start with youtubing a few videos critiquing sarkeesians videos. Internet Aristocrat and thunderf00t come to mind, but there are others too. They do a good job logically debunking hers and others' positions. The bit about meritocracy and objectivity comes from the premise that the internet removed knowledge of the 'controversial' traits (race/sex et al) from the process, leaving skill and achievement as the only known factors for judgment. This contrasts with today's politics, where we are expected to 'elevate' certain castes beyond reproach just for existing as minorities because of specific, usually irrelevant, traits, and to assume their claims of oppression are true because of them. I also had recalled the mozilla incident where a bunch of SJWs working there decided to get the brand new ceo fired two days into his job over past political activity that didn't jive with theirs. Imagine what would've happened if he had gotten them fired because they were gay! There is a trend of this sort of hypocritical behavior coming from the feminist/affirmative action camp and I do tire of it.
No. PC is about controlling the narrative via the redefinition or replacement of words, phrases and their meanings, and social shaming for noncompliance. For example, calling illegal immigrants 'undocumented workers' is a lot less accurate because it side steps the issue on the table (whether they should count as citizens or be sent home), but it is a lot more emotionally appealing to uninformed bystanders who have yet to take positions on the subject.
The trick with most harassment is to ignore it, or blatantly show how stupid the harassers are in front of their peers (more difficult, but still possible). Repeated success at this will actually earn respect over time, leading to LESS harassment. Showing weakness invites more of it. The trick is to identify the behaviors that draw it and change them, or opt not to engage in them while around people who will harass. If someone starts taunting, taunt back and win, if that's not possible, wait for an opportunity when you can. Grow some skin and a spine so as to not take it all so personally. It's insane to expect people to 'respect' every trait by default. If at all possible, be choosy which traits are worn on the shoulder. Respect is earned, not given, and the standard is defined by the person giving the respect, not the one demanding it. If someone is seriously threatening your life, call the police, or, if the threat is immediate, do what's necessary to save your life. I find it interesting that most of these 'victims' are perfectly willing to tell the world about it for pity and attention, but then say they were 'uncomfortable' talking to the police first, who would've told them NOT to blab. Publicizing breakdowns on the internet is going to show everyone that it's working. Stop it already.
Of course, these SJW types know this perfectly well, but their goal is to maximize the draw so they can paint convincing narratives of oppression they can sell to the willing media for attention, money, or political power. Nothing destroys liberty quicker than a culture wide pity party and the left knows that. The neocons do not have a monopoly on fear manipulation (omg 'death threats' 'made' me leave my home!). The violence by proxy that modern feminism perpetrates through the state and other institutions is ironically a lot closer to the kind of systemic oppression they bitch about than any half baked paranoid delusion they've come up with (patriarchy).
I am sick of hearing the same old fallacies over and over. Ditto with the passive aggressive shaming language, crocodile tears, and deliberate misrepresentation of troll 'threats' in order to keep the controversy going. Why is it that slashdot never really covered the opposing side to all of this? The only stories that get through are anti-gamergate/pro feminist, just like with the mainstream media (no surprise there).
Just because a few women (sarkeesian/quinn/dina/wu etc) got called out for fallaciously and hypocritically generalizing/stereotyping one of the largest internet communities doesn't mean that the majority of that community hates women. The community just has a problem with what a few specific women (and men) said. It also has a problem with the so-called 'journalists' (and their pals at DIGRA, silverstring, gawker) covering the community's activities. When journalists editorialize or propagandize, they are no longer journalists. They should have the integrity to leave the editorializing to the op-ed sections of their publications, or, ideally, abstain from it altogether.
Why do these 'justice' warriors hate objectivity and meritocracy so much? When gaming met the internet, it was the ultimate equalizer. All that mattered was the game and how well you played relative to other players, not your race, your sex, or any other irrelevant characteristic. Trashtalk was trashtalk, and only lamers took it seriously. I remember a time when this was looked at as a positive thing. Now it's all about wearing shit on our shoulders and baiting each other into passive aggressive offense. I guess SJW politics had to turn up the intensity in order to keep certain politicians and ideologies relevant. The bottom line is, if someone criticizes you, it does not mean he hates your race, sex, religion, or anything else. Instead of routing all negatives to/dev/oppressed, have the fortitude to listen to the criticism and see where it might apply. If there's truth to it, modify your perspective. If not, discard it. Quit playing the victim. It's a loser's game.
Whether it's outright with a bullet to the head, or a slow smothering with punitive taxation and regulation, the result is esssentially the same. That's why there's little difference between leftists and neocons.
Hate to break it to you, but when it comes to violence and sex in video games, it's the left who does the most bitching. From lieberman and dodd with mortal kombat, through to today's anita sarkeesian and her 'journalist' hipster friends at kotaku, RPS, polygon, ars, etc.
It's already offered as an option for those who are willing to sacrifice their privacy for access to competitive pricing. progressive calls it 'snapshot.' Mandatory compliance is probably a decade or so away.
The left is not concerned with privacy. Neither are the neocons. I just want my due process rights, privacy, and money back, thanks. Any such devices like this would be removed from any car I buy, law be damned. I don't care. I will not be treated like cattle.
Of course men have.. This is part of the larger point: there is no sexism in gaming. Both sexes are stereotyped, both positively and negatively, just like both sexes engage in fraud on kickstarter.
The point is that no one is ever truly 100% safe, and the probability of a troll post being serious is so small it is not worth worrying about. If these sjw types are as skittish as they seem, they shouldn't associate their real names or other identifying information with their activism. If they truly thought they were in danger, their fear would keep them from blabbing about it on social media and hampering the fbi investigation. If it was simple activism, they would've stayed anonymous. No, it is infinitely more likely that this was done deliberately to garner attention to themselves so that they can goad the target subculture into the behavior they claim is pervasive and use whatever negative response they get as 'proof' of the victimhood. Money or sympathy, it's attention whoring at its finest. It netted anita 160k in sympathy money.
I think you'll find OS fanboys on any forum that talks tech. However, I do know that ars people are blowhards in other areas...in certain political persuasions for sure.
Slashdot Mirror
Labeling people trolls does not invalidate their disagreement.
Disagreement is not trolling.
Since when is it bigoted for a guy to announce that he likes attractive women? Gay pride activists have whole fucking parades devoted to their preferences, and are always announcing it to the world.
Of course.. Something new to maintain that all important perpetual offense..
No. they are expressions of frustration... or troll posts, or perhaps both. People need to realize that this shit should not be taken seriously. I think most still know this (the SJWs definitely do), but they' feel compelled to hop on the bandwagon so as not to avoid shaming from their peers. Those quotes are not representative of the whole of gamergate supporters. I am sure you know this as well. In contrast, what is being criticized BY gamergate represents the implications of the feminist party line.
They've done a lot more than just bitch. So far, they've managed to get a bunch of advertisers to pull their ads from media outlets who want to use the veneer of journalism to push their political propaganda. Not a bad first step at all. I wish advertisers would do this with the mainstream media. The fact that big companies have chosen to do this speaks quite a bit about the integrity of the gamergate position, considering how sensitive corps are about feminism and 'diversity.' The fact they've listened at all suggests there are many many more gamers out there who aren't the ones who posted whatever posts you're referring to.
Changing? It might be, but criticism of specific change is not hatred of all change. Again, this is another fallacious argument used by the SJW camp, or really, the same one they use to justify labeling all gamers as misogynists. Personally, I don't care if women play games or not. It's their choice to do so or not. However, I will not support the stifling of creativity by perpetually offended tumblr types demanding their narratives be included, in any media. They're free to make their own games. The irony is that the SJW camp tried to shutdown the FYC, a feminist group trying to get women into game design, in order to drive the donations to their own competing event, speaks volumes about their lack of integrity. Who came to the defense of the FYCs and raised a shitton of money for them? 4chan. Figure that one out.
That 50% stat takes casual players into account. The reason that's relevant is that part of this fiasco revolved around the corrupt sites posting of 'gamers are dead' articles that tried to equate the enthusiast 'core' with the casual who wants an 'i-can-win' QTE driven interactive movie, and then paint them as a 'misogynist minority'. Yet more fallacious reasoning. There are plenty of people who drive their toyotas to work every day, but they are not car enthusiasts who spend their spare time and change on an automotive hobby and race on weekends. (there's the requisite car analogy). There's a reason car manufacturers bother to cater to these people even though more people buy corollas.
Vitriol? Maybe a little. but it is based in truth and it is not passive aggressive. It's a bit actively aggressive. You don't see me crying about being 'oppressed' or 'victimized' by your post. What analysis are you talking about? You went straight to the ad hominems. My post existing or not existing has no bearing on anyone's ability to tell me I'm wrong. If anything, it gives them an opportunity. Your own posts prove that, albeit poorly.
I suggest you start with youtubing a few videos critiquing sarkeesians videos. Internet Aristocrat and thunderf00t come to mind, but there are others too. They do a good job logically debunking hers and others' positions. The bit about meritocracy and objectivity comes from the premise that the internet removed knowledge of the 'controversial' traits (race/sex et al) from the process, leaving skill and achievement as the only known factors for judgment. This contrasts with today's politics, where we are expected to 'elevate' certain castes beyond reproach just for existing as minorities because of specific, usually irrelevant, traits, and to assume their claims of oppression are true because of them. I also had recalled the mozilla incident where a bunch of SJWs working there decided to get the brand new ceo fired two days into his job over past political activity that didn't jive with theirs. Imagine what would've happened if he had gotten them fired because they were gay! There is a trend of this sort of hypocritical behavior coming from the feminist/affirmative action camp and I do tire of it.
No. PC is about controlling the narrative via the redefinition or replacement of words, phrases and their meanings, and social shaming for noncompliance. For example, calling illegal immigrants 'undocumented workers' is a lot less accurate because it side steps the issue on the table (whether they should count as citizens or be sent home), but it is a lot more emotionally appealing to uninformed bystanders who have yet to take positions on the subject.
Self righteous hipster shames those with spines, whinefest at 11.
I am not a climate change denier.
hmm more shaming language, ad hominem and strawmen. No argumentation. What a surprise.
Just remember that al jazeera has its own narrative just like the rest. I will check out their coverage.
The trick with most harassment is to ignore it, or blatantly show how stupid the harassers are in front of their peers (more difficult, but still possible). Repeated success at this will actually earn respect over time, leading to LESS harassment. Showing weakness invites more of it. The trick is to identify the behaviors that draw it and change them, or opt not to engage in them while around people who will harass. If someone starts taunting, taunt back and win, if that's not possible, wait for an opportunity when you can. Grow some skin and a spine so as to not take it all so personally. It's insane to expect people to 'respect' every trait by default. If at all possible, be choosy which traits are worn on the shoulder. Respect is earned, not given, and the standard is defined by the person giving the respect, not the one demanding it. If someone is seriously threatening your life, call the police, or, if the threat is immediate, do what's necessary to save your life. I find it interesting that most of these 'victims' are perfectly willing to tell the world about it for pity and attention, but then say they were 'uncomfortable' talking to the police first, who would've told them NOT to blab. Publicizing breakdowns on the internet is going to show everyone that it's working. Stop it already.
Of course, these SJW types know this perfectly well, but their goal is to maximize the draw so they can paint convincing narratives of oppression they can sell to the willing media for attention, money, or political power. Nothing destroys liberty quicker than a culture wide pity party and the left knows that. The neocons do not have a monopoly on fear manipulation (omg 'death threats' 'made' me leave my home!). The violence by proxy that modern feminism perpetrates through the state and other institutions is ironically a lot closer to the kind of systemic oppression they bitch about than any half baked paranoid delusion they've come up with (patriarchy).
I am sick of hearing the same old fallacies over and over. Ditto with the passive aggressive shaming language, crocodile tears, and deliberate misrepresentation of troll 'threats' in order to keep the controversy going. Why is it that slashdot never really covered the opposing side to all of this? The only stories that get through are anti-gamergate/pro feminist, just like with the mainstream media (no surprise there).
Just because a few women (sarkeesian/quinn/dina/wu etc) got called out for fallaciously and hypocritically generalizing/stereotyping one of the largest internet communities doesn't mean that the majority of that community hates women. The community just has a problem with what a few specific women (and men) said. It also has a problem with the so-called 'journalists' (and their pals at DIGRA, silverstring, gawker) covering the community's activities. When journalists editorialize or propagandize, they are no longer journalists. They should have the integrity to leave the editorializing to the op-ed sections of their publications, or, ideally, abstain from it altogether.
Why do these 'justice' warriors hate objectivity and meritocracy so much? When gaming met the internet, it was the ultimate equalizer. All that mattered was the game and how well you played relative to other players, not your race, your sex, or any other irrelevant characteristic. Trashtalk was trashtalk, and only lamers took it seriously. I remember a time when this was looked at as a positive thing. Now it's all about wearing shit on our shoulders and baiting each other into passive aggressive offense. I guess SJW politics had to turn up the intensity in order to keep certain politicians and ideologies relevant. The bottom line is, if someone criticizes you, it does not mean he hates your race, sex, religion, or anything else. Instead of routing all negatives to /dev/oppressed, have the fortitude to listen to the criticism and see where it might apply. If there's truth to it, modify your perspective. If not, discard it. Quit playing the victim. It's a loser's game.
Over the age of 30? or under? I am not a veteran but I have found that the younger crowd seems far more locked into the PC mindset than older people.
Well you non-americans are free to go to another site with your smarmy arrogance.
Arrogant leftist denounces science challenging marxist narrative. Details at 11.
Whether it's outright with a bullet to the head, or a slow smothering with punitive taxation and regulation, the result is esssentially the same. That's why there's little difference between leftists and neocons.
Hate to break it to you, but when it comes to violence and sex in video games, it's the left who does the most bitching. From lieberman and dodd with mortal kombat, through to today's anita sarkeesian and her 'journalist' hipster friends at kotaku, RPS, polygon, ars, etc.
It's already offered as an option for those who are willing to sacrifice their privacy for access to competitive pricing. progressive calls it 'snapshot.' Mandatory compliance is probably a decade or so away.
They will eventually, when the state and insurance companies mandate the trackers.
The left is not concerned with privacy. Neither are the neocons. I just want my due process rights, privacy, and money back, thanks. Any such devices like this would be removed from any car I buy, law be damned. I don't care. I will not be treated like cattle.
Fools and their money..
Of course men have.. This is part of the larger point: there is no sexism in gaming. Both sexes are stereotyped, both positively and negatively, just like both sexes engage in fraud on kickstarter.
Wonderful. Such tolerance and inclusivity.
The point is that no one is ever truly 100% safe, and the probability of a troll post being serious is so small it is not worth worrying about. If these sjw types are as skittish as they seem, they shouldn't associate their real names or other identifying information with their activism. If they truly thought they were in danger, their fear would keep them from blabbing about it on social media and hampering the fbi investigation. If it was simple activism, they would've stayed anonymous. No, it is infinitely more likely that this was done deliberately to garner attention to themselves so that they can goad the target subculture into the behavior they claim is pervasive and use whatever negative response they get as 'proof' of the victimhood. Money or sympathy, it's attention whoring at its finest. It netted anita 160k in sympathy money.
I think you'll find OS fanboys on any forum that talks tech. However, I do know that ars people are blowhards in other areas...in certain political persuasions for sure.