Recent posts by Thatsomegoodname on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bernie Sanders fatal flaw.

His fatal flaw is he is way too idealistic and way too liberal for American politics. If he is even elected, then what? Obama is moderate as fuck and even he birthed the Tea Party in his first term. Bernie won’t get any sort of shit done with Congress being the way it is.

He has many great ideas, sure but how is he going to do it? “College will be free” How? with what money? If college is 100% paid for by the government I can guaran-fucking-tee you that the prices will skyrocket (see Medicare effects in pharma industry).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Has social media helped us?

Originally posted by vikaTae:

What benefit does that serve?

Making it easier to pamper to over-inflated egos, mostly.


Some social media has made a positive change, such as getting groups together who come from different backgrounds and so would have been unlikely to meet up without it. Likewise, it is capable of removing visual stigmas, allowing people to get to know one another as people, before finding out they are actually different races, or one has a debilitating disability. By that point, something that would usually cause one party or the other to ‘cross the street’, is much less of an issue, and is often deflected completely.

I’m much more of a fan of real-time interaction social media systems obviouisly, and less so of these ‘personal diaries for the whole world to read’ forms.

Social media has potential to bring people together of various backgrounds, no doubt but it just the opposite for most. I feel that it has vastly expanded people’s polarization to whichever idea best suits them (whether right or wrong). Studies have shown that people aren’t particularly interested in what’s right or wrong but would rather consume information that they want to hear. And social media has taken that to the next level where now there are groups of people that agree with each other and think their sort of thinking is ok when it really isn’t.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do you guys think that competitive esports is dominated by males with little to no females?

Ok so one of the major points that was brought up is essentially the cultural aspect both historically from society as well as the industry itself which could hinder this issue. I am not disagreeing on that these exist but I just feel that with the nature of the esports industry (practically being at its infancy but rapidly growing) there should be more female professional gamers. I say this for 2 reasons:

1. I think most importantly the difference between how regular sports and esports essentially develops and picks out their talents. In sports you have children starting from young age, joining school teams or leagues (which are already gender segregated) and then professional teams draft the best outstanding candidates from this pool that is already segregated. In esports, however, there is no gender segregation at the bottom and talent is generally scouted from online rankings (usually the big esports games ranks the players itself). What I mean by that is both males and females play the same game at a basic level and compete against each other. So, essentially, everyone should be in the same playing field as far as developing skill goes and if your skill is top level, theoretically you should be able to compete against the best.

2. I cannot deny that the culture of the gaming environment itself is pretty much toxic to female players on many levels. Now I am not dismissing this to deter a lot of females, but at the same time these factors can be ignored due to the anonymity of the internet. Again going back to the playing ground of where vast majority of the skill to become a professional gamer is developed, one can easily just play the game without revealing their gender, play the game, and get very good at it.

To use the example I used earlier, even chess seemingly has this issue without the stigma behind it that video gaming does.

I had not thought of the sponsorships but in the gaming industry itself, the top few teams get the vast majority of the sponsorship and these teams specifically pick out the best talent (both since they attract more money and can pay more). Also the team manages and negotiates the vast majority of sponsorships so theoretically, if a girl is good enough, she can join a top tier team that comes with the sponsorships. Really the sponsor thing is more in line a huge difference between the best 1 or 2 teams practically hoarding all the sponsors and leaving the rest with little to nothing. So I don’t really see that as a hindrance from a performance (or skill) level.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do you guys think that competitive esports is dominated by males with little to no females?

This is something that has struck me recently. In traditional sports it can be argued that females are not able to compete against males due to the physical factors that essentially serve as a limiting ceiling. However esports does not have this limitation and therefore shouldn’t both females and males be on equal grounds in terms of competing for the best spot?

There are two traditional examples of games (that are not video games) that one can also look at in order to see there still are clear gender polarization: chess and poker. Both of these are skills of mental fortitude and countless studies have shown that women are not inferior to men in terms of brain power. So why is it that most if not all of the best poker players and grandmaster chess players have been predominantly male?

Not sure if there is a right or wrong answer to this so feel free to express your opinions. But please refrain from any sexist remarks and such.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Do you donate money to charity?

If you are employed and have income you should donate to charity so you can get tax deduction.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Mass sexual assaults in Germany

Europe already have had a problem with immigrants being over-representative in crime figures. It really isn’t even fucking surprising. The problem lies in the fact that people genuinely want to help refugees but these sort of incidents really make it hard to find an answer as to what to do in this situation.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is treating everyone equally actually right?

In the book Freakonomics it explains a study that was conducted in which 4 different applications of the exact same qualifications only different names. The names were stereotypical white male, white female, black male and black female. The white male got the most call back by a wide margin followed by white female, black male, black female. There are other things such as the incredibly large disparity in unemployment for African Americans in comparison to other races, the “racial gap” in income.

I am all for repealing AA if it is no longer relevant but I guess that is still up for debate. As far as I can see, minorities are still hindered from achievement from a racial standpoint.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is treating everyone equally actually right?

Affirmative action doesn’t make sense in a pure meritocracy. We are not a pure meritocracy (or even close).

In my home country of South Korea, the whole country is obsessed with tests. You take tests to go to high school. The top high schools will only admit the highest scoring testers. Then you will take test to go to college. Same as high schools, the top colleges will only take the highest test scores. After you graduate college, you will take test to get a job. The best jobs will only take the top test scoring candidates from top universities. It’s literally pathetic. All young adults and teenagers do is study for the next goddamn exam, go to school, then go to academy and literally study the whole day. This is the best resemblance to a pure meritocracy and trust me when I say that you don’t want to be a part of it.

Now for US, the whole affirmative action thing is actually necessary from my point of view. It does its best to equalize lot of the structural racism and give opportunities to minorities. It is just unfortunate that it will help some obscure white guy with a Native American great grand-father from rich parents more than a black guy from the ghettos.

Also I believe there was some study done that show affirmative action actually helps white women more than any other “minorities”. Might be wrong on this one though.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / [Poll] Should Donald Trump be president?

I don’t think voting an ignorant bigot into office is a good idea.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Your view on legalization of Marijuana

Originally posted by stanwise:

How on earth do you figure that blunts are less harmful than bongs? Smoke is smoke, and smoke is bad for you.

Something about butane from lighters. Not 100% sure on this either.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Actually you need expert advice to make sure you’re walking correctly, and to check your requirements. A brisk walk is no good. It has to be something that gets the blood flowing, but for how long? If you start feeling pains in your chest, should you stop or keep going? Is your gait even doing you any favours?

There’s a lot to look at, and an expert opinion is always preferable to going it alone.

Also fitness centers don’t all include a gym. Some do, but the gym is by no means the majority of what they do. If anything, the pool usually takes up the most space by volume of the building.

You can’t be serious. Do I need expert advice on how to breathe? What if I take in more oxygen than my lungs can handle?

Expert advice on diet maybe. But really walking..?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Reasons Trump shouldn't be president

Originally posted by James146:
Originally posted by Thatsomegoodname:
Originally posted by Novellean:


The policies I see from Sanders are great if you have no idea how economics and government work. Great for dreamers, but wouldn’t work on a state level, let alone a national level.

I agree with this sentiment. The man is honorable and fights for social issues like a boss. But a lot of his policies do not include how to actually pay for it.

That being said, Trump would probably find a loophole in the international laws and allow America to file for bankruptcy.

I assume you are being serious?

The former, yes. The latter, no

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

When we stop being sheeple that are nothing more than shit consumers and are constantly being sheared of our due share of the market product

I honestly don’t think that’s even possible. People buy what they want. Humans are not at all rational as far as buying/consuming choices go.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

It’s a good sentiment. I don’t know the full effects of stopping our corn subsidy (or if that’s even possible at this point… would really hurt the food industry as a whole and big corps sure as hell won’t let that happen). That being said, the whole “healthy food is just too expensive!” is a load of shit. There have been studies that actually show that healthy eating is actually cheaper than the alternative.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Reasons Trump shouldn't be president

Originally posted by Novellean:


The policies I see from Sanders are great if you have no idea how economics and government work. Great for dreamers, but wouldn’t work on a state level, let alone a national level.

I agree with this sentiment. The man is honorable and fights for social issues like a boss. But a lot of his policies do not include how to actually pay for it.

That being said, Trump would probably find a loophole in the international laws and allow America to file for bankruptcy.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Just my (further) 2 cents on this issue:

We already subsidize the shit out of corn which is processed to make like 90% of our sugar so I don’t think government interfering will be the way to go. Gyms aren’t that expensive and not the only ways to exercise. I don’t think this is an issue that others can really help someone with; they need to help themselves. How they can do that is a pretty damn good question. If I knew the answer I’ll probably make a lot of money.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by TheBSG:

It isn’t that it isn’t reversible, it’s that naively asserting this knowledge isn’t the solution in itself. Whether or not a person is going to be able to get healthy is up to them, they’re dealing with it, and it’s possible that they may never become healthy again. Do you really think policing people’s awareness gives them the encouragement to overcome a difficult obstacle?

Yea you’re right. I should have specified I wasn’t advocating “fat shaming” or whatever to begin with.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

You guys sure are bent on thinking that obesity is incurable, unpreventable, and irreversible.

Too bad there’s no thin lottery at 7-11.

Either way your arguments have altered my perspective a little bit.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

You just implied that losing weight is as hard as becoming a millionaire. I can see where you are coming from but do you really believe that?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Ok this is going more and more on tangent but here goes:

Originally posted by stanwise:
Originally posted by Thatsomegoodname:

I’m going to borrow Gamer’s words. Certain medical conditions are “triggered” I guess. Obesity isn’t. It’s a prolong process. It can’t suddenly activate and voila you gained 50lbs.


Seen it happen, actually. Several times. Granted, they all involved mitigating medical conditions that in turn caused the obesity, but still.


They triggered a predisposed condition and gained 50lbs? Or getting obese as a side effect (of medication or injury or otherwise). Even still I’m sure this didn’t happen in a short time span. But that’s still going to be a small percent of the people in factor here.

Since you mentioned it, I did read on your other post on metabolic syndrome. I feel like it is an effect rather than a cause. But again, I’m not a doctor.

Originally posted by Thatsomegoodname:

Also if you know you are genetically prone to a disease, you should actively seek to prevent it not neglect it.


What a wonderful, enlightened view! Now, please share your plan with teaching sufficient medical knowledge to every 18-year-old in the country so that they can recognize warning symptoms, navigate the healthcare and insurance systems, and, you know, think past the next term paper deadline.


Because that’s what you’re saying.


They can and should see doctors. Plus they don’t have to go through healthcare/insurance systems on their own (would be insured under parents).

The reality of the world is that most people have such feeble knowledge of medicine that the idea of informed consent is downright hilarious. I’m not fit to make informed decisions about a lot of the care I receive, and I work in health.

I feel like there is more than enough information out there on obesity.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by stanwise:

What is an inherent disability? I was born with a genetic quirk that put me at-risk for developing disability, and a combination of medical neglect and bad luck wound up activating the condition. Is that my fault, because my behaviors contributed to the development of the condition? Or not my fault, because the root cause is genetic and out of my control?

Disability and ability are not black and white.

I’m going to borrow Gamer’s words. Certain medical conditions are “triggered” I guess. Obesity isn’t. It’s a prolong process. It can’t suddenly activate and voila you gained 50lbs.

Also if you know you are genetically prone to a disease, you should actively seek to prevent it not neglect it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by TheBSG:

I’m not obese? Hahahaha, your post is pretty goddamned revealing. At least you’re consistently bad at empathizing. I was born with my disability and it’s purely genetic, but you still somehow thought I was at fault for it. Cool.

I just assumed (you didn’t specify) because we were talking about obesity. If you are born with genetic disability, then that’s another case completely. I don’t expect anyone with inherent disabilities to pay on their own and never said so. I fail to see how your anecdote is even relevant then.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by TheBSG:

I love being vulnerable to make a point:

I feel like everything you described is a result of your obesity not the other way around. I know it’s a vicious circle but ultimately no one can help you except yourself.

There is a quote that struck me couple of years ago: “We judge ourselves by our intentions by others by our actions.” Not everyone is going to know your circumstances and realize that you weren’t intentionally late. Heck they won’t even give a shit most of the time. They’re going to mark you late and be pissed. Such is reality.

You are just as much liable for your actions despite having good or bad intentions.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by stanwise:

Smoking is actually a really good example. Did you know that in the US and Europe, some 60-80% of people with schizophrenia smoke cigarettes? Although the science isn’t yet clear, there’s either something that makes them directly more addictive to people with schizophrenia, or they help schizophrenics control their symptoms in some way and thus are used to self-medicate. Either way, that’s a staggeringly high number compared to the general population at large.

Should we hold them accountable for their smoking, even though it’s very clear that something is wrong in their brains causing them to smoke?

Now, schizophrenics are a very small part of the population. But there are tons of people in other situations – such as coming from a bad family background – who are seeking to self-medicate their stress. Smoking is far less acutely dangerous than alcohol, and since those are the two acceptable drugs of choice in our society, smoking can see like an attractive option.

If you look at rates of smoking over the past half-century, you’ll see steady declines. The small holdout of folks who still smoke, despite knowing perfectly well that it’s bad for them, likely have something else going on compelling them to use drugs. And out of all the drugs, nicotine is one of the few that doesn’t get you high, that you can use at work, that you can safely drive with, etc. The fact that in the US, smoking is twice as common among those below the poverty line as those above it strongly hints that psychosocial stress is driving cigarette consumption.

As such, taking the most vulnerable among us, and saying that they should be responsible for medical costs incurred by something inflicted upon them as much by society as by themselves, seems harsh or outright cruel. So yes, I do think smoking is a good comparison.

Most people who smoke do not have schizo. For those that do and smoking is somehow a side effect (which occurs, I have heard of drugs that make people more prone to gambling) then no they are special cases in which they should be provided for. You cannot make the same claim about obesity. A vast majority of them do not have some rare condition that innately make them prone to being obese. Circumstances? Yes. But not an inherent condition.

If you want to make a comparison, why don’t you compare obesity to obesity? Obesity is much more of a problem in America than say Japan. This has been heavily linked to diet (not even exercise just straight up what you eat).

Also how is obesity inflicted by society? I’m generally baffled by what you mean by this.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Dear Fat People" - Nicole Arbour

Originally posted by TheBSG:

If you sprain your ankle running, don’t expect anyone to help you with your self inflicted wound. Learn more about running and take responsibility for your actions. Wait, you mean good intentions are all you need to be worthy of help? As if fat people have bad intentions and are somehow malicious. Seems like conditional selective individual rights and values, and a great way to neglect a giant part of a society’s health.

I never mentioned anything about good or bad intentions. I’m quite aware fat people are not inherently malicious.

Originally posted by TheBSG:

What’s hilarious is that you’re blind to all that you’re afforded by our modern society because you run before work. Fat people just have a visible luxury to be fat and it’s hardly the worst self inflicted, socially costly affliction.

Straight from Google:

The estimated annual health care costs of obesity-related illness are a staggering $190.2 billion or nearly 21% of annual medical spending in the United States. 1. Childhood obesity alone is responsible for $14 billion in direct medical costs.

Regarding your other posts:
1. Yes I agree that the whole “fat shaming” thing causes more damage than harm. I’m sure most if not all people know that they are slowly killing themselves. The problem lies with whether or not they do something about it. A lot of people don’t really put in the effort to actually try a better diet and exercise (or they do for a while and give up). It’s an addiction, yes but addictions can be broken.

2. I do not run because it is socially beneficial for society (nor do I think that this makes me better than everyone else; I never said that). I do it because it is better for me and my health. If I get into an accident and/or injury while running then yea I do not expect anyone to be in fault for that (also your analogy to driving is flimsy. We have auto insurance because it poses such a great risk).