Recent posts by tghrr on Kongregate

Flag Post

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

What I don’t understand though is how they think that this law is special. Some people claim that legalising gay marriage is a great loss for moralism as their own scriptures prevent them from doing so, but when other things that their scriptures prohibit are legal it’s fine. I’m not even talking about controversial things like abortion, I’m talking about things such as modesty laws. Why has there never been a huge controversy about the law not forcing people to follow Christian standards of dressing but there is a huge one offer people following Christian laws of marriage.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American wymyn will soon be forced to sign up for the draft

That’s a fair point, although I think that certain jobs within the military should, at least for the time being, have a physical requirement.

 
Flag Post

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

Gay marriage: a great loss for religious dominance.

Seriously, just because people are no longer forced to abide by your laws does not mean moralism has been lost. Nobody is forcing you to not abide by your laws, and it doesn’t hurt you if other people break your laws.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American wymyn will soon be forced to sign up for the draft

It makes sense for their to be a minimum level of physical and mental capability that applies to everybody joining the military. This would lead to the military being made up mostly of younger men but this system would be equal for all as well as not making the military lower their standards.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Bernie Sanders fatal flaw.

Really? Anger is his fatal flaw? Not at all. Anger is one of the many reasons why he is so popular. Anger at the issues facing America. Anger at climate change, income inequality, big business protectionism, etc etc. All this does is prove he really cares about making these changes.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is Atheism a belief system?

Not believing in a god by itself cannot be counted as a belief system, but a lot of belief systems have stemmed from atheism and lead to atheism (atheism+, anti-theism, secularism etc).

 
Flag Post

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

Originally posted by BombCog:

In the scope of human history, it is true that there are more than two genders. The effeminate gender of Japan in 1500 CE is as divorced from the effeminate gender of the modern Aka tribes in Central Africa as it is possible to be, and translating them both as Women is little more than a linguistic shortcut. What does that have to do with anything? It’s not a response to the criticisms levied against your post.

It did though, I was told that anybody who believes that there are more than two genders is very likely going to know very little and most anything involved with feminism.

 
Flag Post

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

EDIT: Let me make a wild guess, tghrr. Are you a white guy, by chance?

yes, I am a white guy.

 
Flag Post

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

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by tghrr:

…My god that was a monster post

Yes, it is.
Ergo, I didn’t feel the need to waste my time after reading this:
First of all, by definition it only cares about the problems of women, not any other gender.
Anyone who believes there are (mostly?) more than two genders very likely is going to know very little and most anything involved w/ feminism.

But there are more than two genders though. Plain and simple. Do you not know the difference between sex and gender?

 
Flag Post

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

I have several problems with third wave feminism and the social justice warrior movement. I’ll start with feminism. Just to clarify, I am talking about femimism within the western world, more specifically the U.K and the U.S.A.

Feminism is defined as advocating for woman to be equal to men in social, political and economic terms. I’ll use http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism as my source. I have several problems with this. First of all, by definition it only cares about the problems of women, not any other gender. It is even implied in the name. FEMinism. I’m not going to try to deny that there are still some problems that woman face in society but what feminism doesn’t take into account is that the other genders have problems too. The non-binary genders face constant discrimination, mostly but by no means exclusively by ultra relgious people and the elderly/ far right conservatives.

Men face a hell of a lot of problems in society, I dare say that they could face as many as woman do. I’ll give some examples. In domestic and sexual abuse cases a man is not taken as seriously by the law and a large section of society. They are expected to just be able to take it and even supposed to enjoy anything sexual, even when it isn’t consensual. Woman, on the other hand, are often automatically believed by a large portion of society and is treated favourably by the law when she accuses a man of sexual or domestic abuse. Men also are treated unfairly in divorces in terms of thing such as child custody and alimony payouts. On top of this, in the western world a hugely disproportianate number of homeless people are male, with the U.S.A having over 70% of the homeless population male. There are also societal expectations of masculanity, with things such as men being expected to not show emotion at all and for men to be able to take anything that life throws at them without any help at all. if woman are oppressed in society then there have to be oppressers, which according to feminism must be men. This leads to feminism demonising men and making out that all men who don’t identify as feminists benefit and contribute to sexism in society.

My next major problem with third wave feminism is its lack of basis. The first wave of feminism granted woman equal political rights. The second wave of feminism granted woman equal social and economic rights. These are the goals of feminism, and these have been achieved, which leaves feminists clutching at straws when it comes for reasons why woman are still ‘oppressed’ in society. This is evidenced by things such as the dishonest pay gap. Legally speaking woman have to be payed the exact same as men per hour for the same job. An average woman earns less then the average man in the western world, this is undoubtedly true, but this is not the result of some kind of innate sexism in society, this is just due to the fact that women usually work less hours, often due to woman looking after their children and a large amount of people for religious reasons think that men should earn the money and woman should look after the house. (This is a sentiment I disagree with but it is not some sexism that exists in society. On top of this, feminists often pick the smallest things to get offended over and claim that EVERYTHING is sexualising woman in some way. First of all, it’s an effective marketing ploy. Secondly, in entertainment men are sexualised as much as woman. Most men in video games are very attractive and muscular and are often showing a lot of skin, equally so to woman. On top of this, feminism makes up terms such as male privilage, the patriarchy and rape culture. Male privilage does not exist and we do not live in a patriachy. If we did then why would we spend more money researching breats cancer then any other type of cancer? Why would woman have several extra rights to men, such as not having to sign up for the draft, having the right to genital integrity and the things that I’ve mentioned earlier? Rape culture is an absolutelty ridiculous notion, and the closest thing existing that vaguely resembles it makes it harder for men, not woman! Woman are always favoured in rape cases, and men are always seen as ‘wanting it’ or ‘not being able to control themselves’.

Another large problem I have with third wave feminism is the way in which they go about their cause and the way they go about recruiting people to their cause. They often make up the lie that feminism cares about equality for everybody and if you aren’t a feminist then you are a misogynist. They use this to make a lot of people casually say that they’re a feminist without them knowing the full extent of what actual dedicated feminists do. On top of this the vast majority of what feminists do is just bitch about the tiniest little things on the internet, usually on tumblr. This is counterproductive. There are also idiotic radical feminists(AKA feminazis). These are the ones who think that men are all disguting pigs and that woman should rule. I hope I don’t even need to point out why these idiots are wrong.

My final problem with feminism is the fact that they always dismiss any opposition to feminism as ignorant or misogynistic. Whether it be individuals or groups, such as the mens rights activists, anybody who says anything about gender equality that feminism doesn’t like, or dares to oppose feminism, are often not engaged in proper discussion and immediatly dismissed and demonised. This ties back with the point I made before about people casually being feminists and not knowing much about pure, dedicated feminism. This is because they often blindly defend feminism without any true knowledge of the subject and since they are so convinced that woman are oppressed in society they dismiss any evidence contrary to this statement to be untrue and usually to have been made by misogynistic white males.

I want it to be known that I am not saying that every single person who identifies as a feminist is in any way like the way I have described them. A lot of feminists are far more civil and thoughtful, and know their subject well enough to talk about it properly but are, in my opinion, incorrect and misguided. There are also people who truly recognise that all genders have problems in society and advocate equal rights but wrongly call themselves feminists. The true term for these people are egalitarianists. I consider myself to be an egalitarianist.

Now for SJW’s

This section won’t be nearly as long because most of my problems with SJW’s are the same problems I have with feminism. They are just feminists about everything. What I mean by this is that they do all the same things feminists do (guilt trip people into agreeing with them, calling everything offensive, finding false problems, etc) but do them with everything (ethnicity, sexuality, physical attributes such as height and weight, etc). I would also like to note that whilst this thread has already picked up on the fact that nowadays the term SJW is used more by people who are against these people then by these people themselves, a lot of these people still would call themselves SJW’s and this is the only term that I know for it.

There are some problems I have with SJW’s only. One of these problems is that SJW’s are so damn prevelant in entertainment and media. This is the case with feminism but far more so with SJW’s. SJW’s have also produced some complete idiots such as Anita Sarkeesian. SJW’s usually claim that they are just ‘fighting for social justice’ but in reality they are just fighting for there completely misguided form of social justice. What they want is a society in which people are completely coddled, where anything even remotely offensive is censored out, where you can find ‘safe spaces’ (places where none of what you say can be questioned) and positive discrimination is prevelant to the point that you have it easy as long as you aren’t a cis white heterosexual male, which is a large portion of society. This is all I have to say.

…My god that was a monster post

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The term "Cis"

The term cis seems to have been made up by social justice warriors and/or tumblr so us ‘normal’ people don’t feel left out, as well as giving one more thing they can attack us for. White male heterosexual just wasn’t enough for them.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Circumcision

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Nah, the main problem is the tech isn’t quite there.

I wasn’t even aware the stuff was being thought about. It’s a great idea really.

This reminds me of the time that the pope went to aids ridden Africa and told them that using condoms was immoral

Condoms save the day. Condoms would make Africa as a whole a far better place.

I think this has gone a little bit off the topic of this thread. The thread is like 8 years old. I was looking through discussions on the second oldest page in SD and found this.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Circumcision

Originally posted by vikaTae:

I was thinking more along the lines of a test kit that would fit in your purse, and have a reasonable turn-around time. 10-15 minutes is as far as I’d push it, to maximise the chance that people were still ‘in the mood’ whilst waiting for it.

So you’re looking at a swab and biochip lab setup. One for you, one for your partner.

Sounds expensive. If this thing could be easily mass produced, and cheaply, it would already exist.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Circumcision

Circumcision is every bit as bad as female genital mutilation. It is an invasive, irreversible procedure with risks. Whilst there may be benefits, these benefits can be achieved anyway with good hygiene and a bit of common sense. The only real reason why this is done is for religious reasons as far as I can tell and you cannot claim that it is violating your religious freedom if you aren’t allowed to force an irreversible procedure on your child. There are several potential negatives to male circumcision at birth.

Pain and trauma for the child
Loss of pleasure during orgasm
Inability to experience orgasm
Shorter penis
Erectile dysfunction
Loss of potential early warning alarm for diabetes
Goes against the principle of consent to treatment
Can cause medical problems during the procedure.

I think this procedure should be allowed if an adult wants it done to himself but not forced on children or babies who have no say in the matter.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist: Developer / Retire this game. Bring on Adventure Capitalist 2!

I think that they should torch unity and not bother with flash. Java or python is where to go.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Freebleeding: Empowering or disgusting?

bonerdisplaying- empowering or disgusting?

It’s time that us meninists fight against the matriachy and stop hiding our natural biological processes. For too long woman have made erections seem shameful and embarrasing, causing us men to hide them just to support this oppresive system. I urge all men to stop giving in the misanderist pigs and display their erections with pride!

See how stupid it is?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The singularity

There’s been a request for a post on the singularity. I’ll just pose a few questions to get the topic running

Is the singularity inevitable?

What can we do to slow down the singularity?

What do we do in the case of the singularity?

Is the singularity necessarily a bad thing?

What will be the main contributors to the singularity if it ever happens?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is robot labor a good thing?

Originally posted by vikaTae:

The singularity is coming almost no matter what we do. It’s not about the creation of AI or AGI as such. Rather it’s the point where the rate of new breakthroughs has accelerated to the point where new breakthroughs are coming near-instentaneously. Since the speed at which research progresses has been on an exponential growth curve for well, as far back as you care to go really, not much short of the cessation of civilisation will stop it.

Whether or not the singularity results in the creation of an AI or AGI before the rate of breakthroughs are predicted to start to slow following it (the singularity being the midpoint of an S spline curve) is unknown at this time. Not much of what will happen post-singularity is known, precisely because it’ll be such a disruptive event.

As to human labour not necessary, that’s not necessarily the case. For instance one area I can immediately see applications for human-controlled robotics is in the handling and control of hazardous subdstances. We use robotics for such tasks now, but as we’re able to integrate the robotics with our human nervous systems ever more tightly, we will reach the point depicted in the ‘surrogate’ series of graphic novels (or the inferior film of the same name) in which the robot is from a senses point of view, indestinguishable to inhabit as your own body.

At that point you literally do get disposable bodies where it doesn’t really matter if a corrosive or highly radioactive element is splashed on them; the person controlling them is safely elsewhere.

Moving such human controlled robotics to other theatres is equally possible. A neurosurgeon able to physically enter your brain and operate on the microscale with their ‘own hands’ similar to how the Da Vinci surgical robot does it but with much finr control.

Outbreak control specialists completely secure from the pathogen controlling robotic bodies that can handle infectees with no risk to themselves and still be just as human as if they were standing there themselves. In a way they are.

Robotic soldiers controlled remotely are unlikely due to the risks inherent in signal jamming at close ranges – airbourne drones don’t have this problem as much because of the distances between them and the target.

But there are still plenty of possibilities for robotics to enhance human workforce abilities, rather than just replace them outright.

I see your point but widespread robot labour will in many cases completely replace the need for human labour, massively increasing unemployment. Some jobs may work better with human intervention but many jobs will almost certainly be outright replaced.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is robot labor a good thing?

In my opinion if robotic labour goes too far it will cause two problems.

First of all, the singularity. If we develop the physical capabilities and AI of robots and build them in great numbers then the singularity will be an increased threat.

Second of all, if human labour is barely needed anymore then it will cause mass unemployment. The working class would cease to exist and humans wouldn’t know what to do with themselves.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Your view on legalization of Marijuana

I personally do think that cannabis should be legalized and regulated.

I don’t see a single reason why it shouldn’t be legalised for medicinal purposes, and alchohol and tobbaco are every bit as bad if not worse than pot.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is Christianity true?

Christianity, along with all organized religion, isn’t true. There is literally nothing to say that any holy texy is correct except from the holy text itself. That’s like trying to use the Harry Potter books to prove that Harry Potter is real.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Sexualisation and Sexual Objectification in Video Games

I think that sexual objectification is fine as long as it is the right place at the right time and it is something that you expect, it shouldn’t just be thrown into a game randomly. For example, you should obviously expect copious amounts of sexual objectification in a porn game and if you didn’t have it then the game would be a complete flop and would let everybody down. If you told people that these kinds of games shouldn’t have this content in and try to remove it or censor it then you would be ruining an entire genre and making a lot of people incredibly pissed off with you.

On the other hand, if this sexual objectification is just put there unexpectedly for the hell of it then it is wrong. If you involve sexual objectification in a game without a clear warning you will just surprise people and perhaps piss people off. When I was playing far cry 3 I was 12 years old and this game has naked boobs and sex in it. The game was an 18+ but there was no warning for this either, as on the back of the game it said it had online, bad language and violence but not sex. I recently finished far cry 4 and this game had boobs as well (as well as a quick flash of a male crotch, just to not be sexist) but this time I was expecting it, not because of any warning but because of experience.

What I am trying to say is that I think that sexual objectification is fine as long as it is going to be expected. Give people what you say you are going to give them, nothing more, nothing less.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What's so ethical?

I’m consequentialist (I think the end justifies the means) because I believe that if the end product is going to make a big difference then it is worth whatever struggles you had to go through to get there. For example, if you needed to find a cure for a disease that could destroy the world but to do this you had to test it on people which caused them more suffering than just dieing from it then I think that would be worth it. Even if these tests were done on billions of people it would still be worth it in my opinion because if the end is something like saving the world it is worth doing horrible things to any fraction of Earths populations.

However, if the end is unimportant and the means are horrible it isn’t worth it. In my opinion you should always consider how bad the means are in comparison to how much good it will do and use that to work out if it is worth it or not. It is unfortunate that people can use ‘the end justifies the means’ to get away with things such as torture (which doesn’t even work effectively).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why are you Atheist?


Originally posted by tghrr:

When we were in science class we were taught about how the core was liquid metal and the girl sat opposite me (who is a devout Sikh) said ‘hmm, someone must have been around to melt all of this metal, it must be G-d.’ I wanted to strangle her. She knows absolutely nothing about the formation of planets and why the core is hot and so on yet she just uses G-d as an answer for the things she knows nothing about and has made no effort to try to learn about.

Yes, that’s a key problem. It matters not whether you have a spiritual system of belief or not. If you have taken the time and the energy – its not an insignificant amount of either – to educate yourself about the world around you and investigate your own faith as much as you can, then you are in the express minority.

The problem is, it’s very easy to say “an unfathomable power did it, so I don’t have to think about this any more” and just accept things are the way they are because they are the way they are. It is much harder to question, to pursue. So the ‘ignorant masses’ as it were, are likely to always outnumber those of whichever stripe who are willing to pursue things further.

That be depressing, that be.

That is all true and it is somewhat upsetting. If you want to discuss anything about this further then please do, but if so then can you make the debate/conversation starter because I am too lazy

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why are you Atheist?

I am atheist because I believe that it is the most logical and open-minded point of view. I don’t like ‘believing’ in things without any kind of reason to believe in it. The only evidence for religion is whichever holy scriptures they believe in but atheism accepts whatever is proven scientifically. Atheism also accepts that there views can be wrong and they change their views if they have sufficient reason to whereas religion only accepts whatever is written there and they won’t accept anything other than what is said. Religion also is condemned by an old, outdated moral code. Since they won’t accept any kind of change the people who wrote the scriptures just went along whatever they thought was the correct moral code and since most religions are old the moral codes of them are generally sexist, brutal, homophobic and barbaric. Another thing that I think atheism does better is the reason why people believe in it (not sure if that sentence is good English). Atheists hold their beliefs because they agree with science and they think too logically to accept that supernatural forces are in play. Religious people generally only believe because they are either jumping on the bandwagon, they were born into it, they are scared into it by hell or they use religion to comfort them. I’m not saying that all Theists are like this and I’m sure that some atheists are atheist for the wrong reasons as well.

I find that a lot of younger religious people have no reason for their faith and are closed-minded. I am in a class of 13 and only 3 of us (myself included) are atheist. Us three are some of the smartest but that is not what I am talking about. When we were in science class we were taught about how the core was liquid metal and the girl sat opposite me (who is a devout Sikh) said ‘hmm, someone must have been around to melt all of this metal, it must be G-d.’ I wanted to strangle her. She knows absolutely nothing about the formation of planets and why the core is hot and so on yet she just uses G-d as an answer for the things she knows nothing about and has made no effort to try to learn about. Another one of the kids in my class was born and raised a Christian (not too observant I don’t think.) This kid is almost an atheist and he said that he believes in science but then he said that he believes in the miracles of Christ. This is an incredibly ignorant point of view IMO. Just because he was raised a Christan means that in his mind he has to still believe in a small part of it, even though he generally agrees with atheism. I don’t know what this makes him. When I asked him why he believed in this he said ‘I just do’ which pissed me off even more. On top of all this he says that now he is hearing all these Jewish stories (we are a Jewish school, I am born Jewish but I don’t believe in it.) This proves that he is just jumping on whatever he is told and I fear that many people do this.

Damn this took me a long time to type, if you want to reply then please do and I apologize if anything I said didn’t make sense or seemed irrelevant or if I rambled at all. If you do reply I will probably reply back as long as you are polite. Thanks for reading :)

tl;dr, I don’t care if this is too long, bloody read it! You aint gettin a summary.