Recent posts by TheBSG on Kongregate

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex Issue

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex Issue

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Effects of Increasing Minimum Wage. Is it good or bad?

Well right, same difference. That’s the number they use to track the inflation of the cost of living.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Effects of Increasing Minimum Wage. Is it good or bad?

Minimum wage is supposed to match inflation. That’s it’s function. It’s not meant to delineate good jobs from bad jobs. Minimum wage in the US does not match inflation, and so it should be raised. Those republicans that oppose the concept of minimum wage ironically are actually opposing the concept of inflation that they are most likely to be contributors to.

Maximum wage curbs inflation but must be instituted by the lapdogs of those who would have their magnitude of wealth curbed as well, and so is not suggested by these ashamed lap fatties we call corporate politicians. They go on assuring us that somehow paying everyone in our country marginally more is what’s causing inflation, either because they genuinely believe they can get to 2000 pounds and survive, or because they don’t believe they’re that fat.

At some point we have to recognize that the meritocracy is a lie and that the dumbass who actually thinks there’s going to be something to buy once he owns all of the money is going to keep making money because of math not because he’s intelligent or has good foresight.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Okay, so the gist is:

Indie game made by a woman gets a bunch of coverage, starting with some articles that were absolutely feminist slanted. As bigger names in gaming media picked up coverage, there was a big backlash on twitter of threats and attacks on her, some of which revolved around the fact that she was “only” getting coverage because she’s a woman. She goes under the radar for a few months until her ex boyfriend posts a long diatribe about their personal lives, including chat transcripts, and ultimately false claims that she had cheated with a reviewer at Kotaku, and had exchanged money or sexual favors for a positive review score. This was proven false on both practical sense, and just logistical terms of timelines. He never wrote reviews for her game, and they didn’t know eachother the one time he was involved in any decision making regarding her game.

There was a lot of “middle of the road” criticism from “not sexist” gamer bloggers that gave an extensive review of the game, comparing it to other reviews in the industry, and accusing the industry of mass favoritism and a conspiracy by feminists/sjw/what have you, to overtake the gaming journalism industry. The reality is that journalism in general is fickle, and the blog side of the internet had run with the feminist designer slant, and game journalism is always eager to get a more generalized spotlight, and ran with those articles. I don’t even know if I disagree with the idea that the original game wasn’t that noteworthy the same way I’d say Phil Fish is profoundly overrated, but saying that’s a feminist or in Fish’s case a hipster issue, and not just an issue with a young and fickle game design industry is kind of the problem.

So the way people were talking about gamergate was bad then, once it was confirmed by Kotaku that the claims in the dox letter were in every way fabricated, the internet exploded. One side tried to spin it as “ethics in journalism,” which started out as a bold statement, but slowly got whittled down to “They shouldn’t talk about social justice issues in game design articles,” which is neither an ethically relevant point in journalism, nor was that the reason they opposed the original game’s high review score on kotaku in the first place. The original game designer, among several people who came to her defense, has their personal information stolen and uploaded to the internet. Nude photos, information about kids’ schools, travel plans, business documents, client information, and more was spread, causing businesses to close, people to lose jobs, and entire websites to shut down, none of which was due to corruption, but because private information was publicized.

Then in the ensuing months, teenagers sitting in their basements who hate women and love videogames touted the #Gamergate tag either genuinely because they read nothing about it and just wanted a fight to join in on, or because they were disingenuous trolls who wanted to further the turmoil and stir the pot. People were DoSed, lies were constructed about people using truths so that the person had to share their entire lives to clarify the story well after the damage had been done. Multiple events and conventions were shut down because of death threats and shooting scares. The estimated loss of income for the gaming journalism industry was widely varied, but all of the reports were significant.

An angry boyfriends fake revenge porn attempt to slander his ex mobilized a social campaign of “gamers” who feel as though women are ruining videogames and your interpretation of the event was that “SJWs” provoked a feminist issue where there wasn’t one.

The moderates of both sides need to be compared here. Gamers at the time were using the term #Gamergate an saying we need more accountability in games journalism, some of the articles having nothing to do with the original issue and instead picking up older instances of actual review score manipulation. If they did address the feminist issues, they said “SJWs oppose Lara Croft without understanding the nuance in her puzzle platformers.” They weren’t addressing the criticisms of feminists, but defending their intentions and equating people failing to recognize those intentions with fringe crazies. To make the issue even worse, they defended these unrelated and uninvolved posts by saying “I’m not threatening women, so I am not sexist.”

Feminists were suggesting that maybe this reaction in gaming kind of proves that the overall culture in gaming needs to work on its acceptance of women and its understanding of gender issues. They pointed out how the same people that are threatening to rape females in the games industry are using the hashtag #Gamergate as those defending Lara Croft, as those who wanted to talk about conspiracy in games journalism and reviews. They pointed out that, if gamers wanted to talk about corruption and bias in games, why not investigate the pervasive misogyny and other actually studied and statistically significant issues, but were addressed with that same #Gamergate tag.

“Gamers” aren’t bad guys. There aren’t a shitty subsection of gamers that need to be shot and killed either. Gaming in general needs to grow when it comes to social issues. Feminists aren’t ruining free speech. There isn’t a subsection of feminists that are the bane of society. Feminists in general can sometimes be authoritarian and uncompromising with their expectations on society, and should keep freedoms and their importance in mind. These are nuanced, intelligent ways of addressing arguments you oppose. Labeling and disregarding is easy, but doesn’t develop your argument.

The term SJW is not a coherent one. It’s an isolation of things people demonize about feminism so they don’t have to consider reasonable problems feminists bring up. When I say reasonable, consider for a second that we feminists as a whole have had internal intellectual debates and believe these are reasonable points, and people outside of that group still call us SJWs for it. I do not deny there’s a great swath of feminists who really really make it hard for me to teach people, but I’d argue more than half of them are just like I was in this thread: Angry about how generalizations like “SJW” afford people who are otherwise uninvolved the right to an opinion.

[Made some edits after reading through the wikipedia for gamergate, which is actually one of the best wiki entries for a subtle social event online I’ve read. I mentioned Phil Fish here and didn’t even know that him leaving game design was because of Gamergate and now I actually think Gamergate did something good :D]

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

Ok you do so…and when I wake up I’ll give the other short paper (rollseyes) side.

I know we don’t like each other, but I do prefer it when you’re not making false accusations against me. So once again, thanks for the somewhat round-about apology.

I genuinely didn’t realize I had said you painted all of feminists that way, and I know what I was trying to say in that post, (that you inadvertently end up painting all feminists this way) and it got muddled with my actual point which results in the same argument, so it only enraged me. It is something that happens with us, and I think it’s a combination of our personality quirks not matching up. I say a lot, and I am trying to get a general concept across because I don’t actually know technically enough to make a concise point, one of my offhand, couched ways of making the point triggers your need for definitions and actualities, and we get caught in a spiral of “ACTUALLY I DIDN’T” and “I DONT CARE IF I SAID THAT, LISTEN TO WHAT I MEAN NOT WHAT I SAY.”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Like people were sexually violated and had their lives threatened. The opinions involved are going to sound extreme, but that doesn’t mean all of the opinions involved can be disregarded, and if you want to have an opinion about it, please know what you’re talking about. I get the earnest intentions in your post, but it’s seriously enraging to hear someone talk about an issue you know a lot about with such armchair authority. I am the king of armchair generalists so I’ve learned how to tactfully talk about things I’m still unfamiliar with, but I can still look like a complete asshole and whine when a new group doesn’t immediately consider my observations a unique new perspective and tells me to fuck off.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

So instead of getting angry and illustrating why the above post is problematic, which it absolutely is and anyone who gets angry at it has totally a right to, I’m going to explain this to you.

But it’s not anyone’s right. And people get to be angry. It doesn’t invalidate their arguments. A person who told you right now “Well that’s because you didn’t read anything but the extreme headlines about it, and instead of hearing what us feminists had to say, grouped the issue as a fringe one and we were yet again silenced by people’s ignorance.” you’d get defensive about not opposing feminism when, from their perspective, you absolutely are.

Give me a minute to write a short paper (rollseyes), or find the right, less subjectively feminist side of the gamergate controversy.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

But you realize I’m still making a claim that results in the same thing you oppose, right? That you use the word SJW to avoid addressing feminist issues you disagree with? A claim we can argue about because I’m not suggesting you explicitly said this, but that it’s why you use the term? Can you appreciate that is what I have been actually trying to say, and what I actually want to argue about because it’s relevant to my values and improving both of us? I poorly wrote a point that accidentally implied you said as much explicitly, but I am suggesting more specifically that using the term SJW is not useful and is indicative of avoidance of issues. That’s my argument, not that you said it, not that you were making that argument, that maybe you pathologically do that, and to investigate that possibility by talking about actual issues, like Gamergate, where you felt justified in assigning blame to the demonized version of feminism that is “SJWs.”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Originally posted by TheBSG:

I think sexist and racist people are far more of a bane on society than extremist feminists [that you paint all of feminism as.]

I absolutely mispoke in this post. I was trying to link the point about your outrage at “SJW” to the likelihood that you probably disagree with issues feminists wouldn’t consider fringe. I apologize for this incorrect addition which I did not harp on nor was the point nor hedge on my argument. I did not mean to mislead anyone into believing you are opposed to feminism and was not lying, and I think I made that very clear in my rebuts to your implication that I did. Allow me to correct my intended statement?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Can someone who has kids explain my point coherently in a way where he has to be creative if he wants to repeat himself again?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Or maybe you have issues with certain feminist arguments, just like I have issues with certain feminist arguments, and I’m imploring you to improve feminism by arguing about the issues and not generalizing them so they can be disregarded. You’re either not part of the feminist movement enough to make concise and informed statements about it or you would’ve, or you’re opposed to things we in the wider feminist community would identify with, not consider fringe, and would like to specifically argue with you about. Which is it?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:
It’s not just a few bad apples in the SJW movement that are the problem. Look at how that community reacted to Gamergate.

I disagree with your opinions about gamergate. I identify as a feminist who considers gamergate a clear example of patriarchy in gamers. Does that automatically categorize me as a SJW here, or does it make me a feminist who defends gamergate, I’m having a hard time mouthbreathing this one?

(I already made this point earlier, so if you reply to it now assuming we’ve moved on somehow, you’re “lying.”)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Originally posted by TheBSG:
Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

SJW are the bane of society.

Really? Nevermind that using a colloquially insulting term for a vast group of people with various opinions is pretty much a meaningless statement about your prejudices, let’s just say you were referring to people who bring up social justice issues. They’re the bane of society? You can’t think of anyone thing or people that impacts society in more profoundly negative ways than people complaining on the internet? Do you seriously think that’s a useful contribution to any discussion and not just you disregarding something you’d rather not deal with? Normally I wouldn’t humor such a useless post, but you’re honestly a lot smarter than you want to seem and you’re a self-proclaimed logical atheist, so I feel responsible for my teammate’s portrayal in a different topic.

By the way everyone, this is where I was a spineless liar, implying FlabbyWoofWoof disparaged feminism in this thread. I have to prove he disparaged feminism before he’ll respond to the points in this post, or the ones where I predicted why he had this complex and suggested how he’d defend it. I really aught to give people more grace to move past their defense mechanisms. Instead I unfortunately tie it to my position which, of course, I believe is true.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Remember when you insisted for 3 pages that the term “atheist” meant “gnostic atheist” and I was an idiot for saying otherwise, and then the entire internet disagreed with you and in no way related to the actual debate we were having about the priory of people’s actions and their philosophies? What fucking wars are you winning with these posts but the ability to define the world how you want it to be instead of addressing what’s actually there with your unique perspective and understandings?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

I realize I provided a lot of words to sift through, but you’re a robot if you seriously cannot address the actual fucking point I’m making.

You didn’t use the word feminism. That’s not my fucking point. That’s your mouth breathing neckbeard need for definitions way of avoiding the actual intellectual discussion we could be having.

You’re using a subjective term to avoid a debate about feminism. Kasic does the exact same fucking thing. You say “I’m totally for feminism, but it’s those dark SJW that do everything ambiguously evil” I am saying that’s bullshit. Address that.

I am not even disagreeing or addressing your incoherent point that you’re not in disagreement with the vague institution of feminism. I am saying that we might agree on every instance of “SJW” that are problematic, but if you just fall back on your term to apply to anyone who you disagree with, you might miss learning something about feminism that’s actually paramount to our struggle but because you sweep it under the term SJW, like you did me when we disagreed, you wouldn’t actually learn it, or contribute your own understanding to it.

You’re just avoiding shit you probably disagree with more than you want to admit. That’s my half assed assumption and you’ve done nothing but reaffirm predictions I made in these word soups. Holy fuck, I don’t even want to call you names because we disagree, I want to call you names for how fucking wasteful and pedantic you are. I love disagreeing with people, I hate having to assuage your defense mechanisms for not having to think about shit just to make my totally debateable points about actual fucking social issues.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Like how do people who use this website have coherent opinions about things while being so prone to the most pedantic hangups? When I reread threads from the past it’s nothing but this bullshit. My argument isn’t that the word SJW was Feminist in your post. I am not accusing you of doing something you didn’t do, I initially implored you to put your hyperbole in perspective, or be suspicious of labeling things you don’t like about feminism “SJW.” Deal with it, argue against that concept, or disregard me. Don’t call me a liar because you don’t agree with me and drag the topic on some dumbass fight over whether you said a word you said. Let’s talk about why you genuinely think someone bitching [SJW] on the internet is the worst problem in a situation where a woman’s body was violated by strangers. Let’s argue about where we disagree, because that’s my feminism, and labeling me a SJW because we disagree is, as I assumed, your defense mechanism and not a coherent or useful grouping.

[Talk about a waste of energy.

Shit, I was being a little generalizing when I suggested everyone on this site is pedantic because of my frustrations with this site. Maybe I should clarify that I just think we’re wasting energy on not learning new things for dumb reasons. I get making generalizations, but I also try to understand why I am making a generalization when I do it.]

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Seriously, reread this thread. He blames “The SJW movement” for #gamergate. Go look up gamergate. Who is the bane of society in that situation? Why do I have to explain to someone who already doesn’t agree with me why they have to put the term “bane of society” into context and admit they’re probably opposed to a few feminist ideals and are making it easier to not grow by labeling them extreme? I shouldn’t have to play magic the dictionary definition gathering to make a point. Oh you’re right, you limited your argument to an ill-defined subjective category based on your judgements, you can’t counter that!

I have pleasant, life changing arguments with people who are so unlike me in discussions and in other formats on the internet. And they’re arguments, we’re passionate, we disagree strongly, but when someone says "Put “Bane of existence” into context," they consider for a cocksucking second that maybe people bitching on the internet isn’t that bad. Or they defend it in a way that makes the other person think or provokes them. “You’re lying! I didn’t use that word on purpose so I could piss blood if someone accused me of being against feminism!” is not even close to a coherent defense. Not because it’s mean or not friendly, but because anyone I know who has changed my mind on anything would probably giggle and find that weak. I said I think SJW is a subjective, non-defined group that’s personal to you. That’s what I said. I was not mistaken on what I read, I am making a judgement.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

You did not use the word feminism and it seems like you’re pretty aware of it. You used the term SJW instead and I am calling that problematic and ultimately revealing of what you actually think of feminism. I gave reasons why I believe this earlier. Your explicit use of the term “SJW” doesn’t exclude your impact on a different group, feminists. I think you are using the word SJW to avoid issues you don’t want to deal with. You do not speak as though you endorse feminism, and instead label feminist issues that are difficult for you to handle as the bane of society. That kind of hyperbolic language involved with a topic that deals with sexual assault, domestic violence, and women’s rights is inappropriate. Angry feminists who you don’t agree with on the internet are not the bane of society. Rapists, abusers, and the patriarchy that develops policies are banes of society. As a feminist, I find a lot of problematic things in my community that I think are destructive. I think a lot of those ideas come from earnest anger, and very few radical feminists are demonstrably awful people that I’d put in categories with PETA activists and Dubai Princes. If you are a feminist, then stop hurting my group. If you aren’t a feminist and think SJWs are the bane of society, then you’re opposed to feminism and in denial.

Or: Man it really sounds like you really want to have a discussion about feminism! This sounds worth my time! People force me to explain shit to them that they don’t care to know in the first place in order for me to validate calling them a shithead. This place is full of disingenuous people that have no actual legitimate interest in growth, not because of their good or bad tactics, but because of the kinds of things they waste other people’s time arguing about.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Here is another lie about how I interpret most of your posts: (or the words I’m putting in your mouth.)
“When I don’t want to evolve my thinking I bitch about definitions and apply labels that allow me to dismiss things.”

Seriously I made actual points you could argue with earlier, you’re just avoiding the actual discussion I’m trying to have with you. SJWs is a word you use to delineate things you disagree with in the overall field of feminism and it is neither a defined group, nor something someone who wants to improve the movement would make claim to. Forgive me if I’m not letting you play that fiddle.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

I made 3 other posts where I explained your delineation between SJW and Feminists is arbitrary and just makes it easy for you to dismiss issues you don’t want to be challenged on, we could have a good discussion about the useful aspects of feminism and how I agree that extremist feminists make it more difficult, or we could debate whether your criticism of SJWs is defensive and useful. This isn’t the first time you’ve used aspbergers actualities to avoid talking about the issue and then call me a liar because I didn’t use scare quotes. Ooooh boy, words are interchangeable and I’m pretty sure you use the word SJW cause you’re opposed to feminism not cause you’ve got a handle on who the bad feminists are. Hohoho, it’s like I can read between the lines and wont give you a pass because you limited your generalization and hyperbole. Sounds like lying to me.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

You’re right, I lied and you’re not just performing pedantic backpeddling.

Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

SJW are the bane of society. Pure and simple. They are easily offended. That is it. Not worth the time and effort to even rail against. Let them eat themselves alive..that is the inevitable.

Oh right, you used the word SJW, so your disparaging of social justice issues that are important to feminists, the people who get called SJW, is a nuanced value system. Like n’s and black people, you’re not being racist, you’re talking about the Ns!

I’m the idiot holding a hyperbolic generalization that includes use of the phrase “bane of society” seriously to some accountability. The kid just called me a liar instead of clarifying his point. What a shithole website.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Modern Feminism and SJW's.

Again, “The SJW movement” is a pejorative and not a coherent group. I strongly doubt you are interested in improving the effectiveness of feminism to begin with, so your generalization of the group isn’t really useful. Personally I found there was a lot more vitriol and disgusting things said by the generalized group of “gamers,” but I am a gamer and I didn’t say shitty things. I think sexist and racist people are far more of a bane on society than extremist feminists that you paint all of feminism as.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should we relax marriage laws even further?

It would also be considered fraud in today’s laws, as being married to more than one person is illegal.

I see literally no reason to develop laws respecting polyamorous relationships. The concept of marriage was legally protected to establish a more stable nation. The economic logic of polyamory makes sense from a legal perspective, and socially it’s actually pretty healthy and provides a great environment for raising kids. I mean, realistically, if you plot having kids on a few graphs, most measurements would say you shouldn’t have kids, but if you do have kids, have a lot of them. More parents makes that a lot more manageable. I’d be curious to see how much food waste there is in a household like that. At first I think it’d be higher, but then I imagine having a good spread of ages means food gets eaten one way or another.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

See Karma? I engaged JHCO, but not in a way that gave his position the credit that he actually believes it. He either has to talk on a realistically human level with me and identify why I’m saying these things because he knows it’s not unreasonable to hold a person accountable, or he’s going to ignore/bowl over my points in order to assert things. I’m not pretending we both have the same goals in this discussion. I am not adhering to the social contract that enables him to seem consistent or genuine. He can’t group my ideas into some umbrella of liberal and make vague references to what I’m saying without actually rectifying the neoconservative religious party’s insistence that they own this society and the traditional conservative values of personal religion because he’d just be revealing whatever his actual goals were. He’s full of shit, and he fills everyone here up with shit and no one grows or thinks or evolves their positions because of trolly shit like that and I feel duped as you should too.

Mathematically I disagreed more with SaintAjora than I do JHCO’s proclaimed beliefs, but I learned more and developed as a person through my interactions with SaintAjora because she was an intelligent and earnest thinker. Trolls and idiots ran people like her off, and the only ones of us left are crapshooting like Karma said, or are like myself and feel invested and responsible for this place. Either way I do not think that debate forums are bad innately, but that the cowardice of disingenuous people, or the fear of dumb people to grow stagnates debate boards and alienates anyone who would contribute something worthwhile.