>cultural marxist that lacks the most rudimentary conceptual grasp of how the free market works
>people outside of her clique still giving her attention

This kills the gamer.

Quote from: Verbatim on February 10, 2016, 11:27:51 PM

the belief that women, as people, ought to have the same rights, privileges, responsibilities, etc. as men do

But they do in the First World.

if no one ever killed anyone, i would still be anti-murder**

**for no good reason

i see no reason to eschew a label even if you believe that the problem is no longer persistent where you live

You guys overreact every single time she's brought up. She fuels her campaign with your overreaction. You act like my OP is her actual endgame. She's a hot button. A trigger that brings out your worst.

Why shouldn't we react accordingly? She nosedived face first into an industry with no prior knowledge of and trash talked the shit out of it in order to gain tumblrina brownie points and kickstarter money.

What she did was the equivalent of Caitlyn Jenner shitting on theatre for being transphobic. Literally what, how and why.

It's about as useless as actively calling yourself pro-choice in a world where abortion is entirely legal and accepted by all.

how do you define "actively" labeling yourself

because if you think i "actively" label myself a feminist, in the sense that i bring it up in conversations when it isn't necessarily warranted ("As a feminist, I..." [okay, maybe I used to do that]), you'd be wrong

it's only when the subject crops up that i'll let people know that i'm a feminist, and i always have to clarify that i mean in the traditional sense of the word--and it's just frustrating when i'm one of the only people here who embraces that

you say it's useless, i call it being principled

The movement ain't about the right to vote or work anymore, Verb. It's about fighting manspreading and debating if  trans-exclusionary radfems have a point or not.

I think his point is that there's little need for people to still openly identify as a feminist.

No, I got that--my concern is that these people don't identify as feminists period, openly or otherwise.

Well, it's not a "concern" as much as it's a petty grievance. It's no big deal being a feminist--and the only reason you wouldn't is because you don't want to associate yourself with radicals, which isn't a good reason not to call yourself anything, let alone feminist. It's rooted in pusillanimity and nothing else.

Like I said earlier, though--it doesn't matter what you identify as, as long as what you believe makes sense. If you're for women's rights, you're a feminist whether you like it or not, so I shouldn't be too vexed over it. I just wish people would embrace who they are and what they believe--no matter if it seems redundant or not.

I'm sure there's still some, but I do believe that in developed and western countries these people are nothing but an extremely small minority.

See, this is where I start to have a problem, though. People like to pull the relative privation card.

"There's bigger problems over here in this third world country, so that means feminism in the first world is irrelevant."

The thing is, people don't necessarily agree with you that women have it made right now in the First World. As much as people like to make fun of the whole wage gap myth, there's still arguments to be made in favor of its existence, and they haven't exactly been empirically proven wrong yet. And there's still people out there who believe that women are depicted in demonstrably sexist ways in the media (more so than men are), and they have a right to voice that opinion in the name of feminism.

Since they already have them, it has started targeting different things like stare raping and manspreading.

Or insulting portrayals in media, which is my thing. I don't think that's as petty an issue as "manspreading" or "stare raping," which I haven't even heard about.

Virtually everyone of reasonable intelligence in a developed country is a feminist in the original sense of the word.

But see, that's the point.

If they were, they probably would agree with people like Anita, and that women should be portrayed less lasciviously in the media. But they don't--so it's kinda hard to believe that they're feminists in the traditional sense of the word when they are okay with how female sexuality is handled by the media.

And because there's very few real issues still left, the few people who still openly, repeatedly and loudly proclaim that they're feminists generally fight for things that are essentially non-issues.

Blatant fallacy of relative privation here. I was wondering if you were just going to outright do it.

Question: Am I still a feminist if I only believe that equal rights should apply to white females?

i've never seen a single video of her

Even if the game did force you to do that, what's the problem with killing women in video games?

Even if you had to kill those women, what's the difference between that and torturing and killing men?

Violence in video games is fine as long as women aren't hurt?

Well, her argument was less focused on the violence towards the women, and more on the situation that they were in--almost completely nude, so as to create erotic tension, or something. Like, she thinks the game is trying to derive a perverse sense of pleasure from desecrating their bodies while being a voyeur. It wasn't really about the violence itself.

Again, it was a terrible example and she even lost points from me for that. I can't really defend it.

Whenever Anita or feminism pops up, there is a reason I tend to NOT talk in these threads.

Charlie thinks every post against Anita is overreacting.

Verbatim thinks everyone should identify as a feminist, even though he knows completely how misrepresented feminism can be.

SecondClass is just being SecondClass.

This.is.why.

And yet you did the same thing last page of this post.

I didn't do anything like that--I merely implied that "her arguments" are the only thing about her (Anita) that matters. It aggravates me when people attack someone's character instead of the content of their arguments, considering that I've been a constant victim of that sort of thing for years.

So my point was that if you're going to walk into a thread about Anita Sarkeesian, the only thing you should be talking about is her arguments, because everybody already knows that she's kind of an unlikable bitch. Fuck circlejerks and fuck preaching to the choir.

Also, >8 likes on that post

I do love how the dumbest posts ever are always eaten up by this community.

Well, her argument was less focused on the violence towards the women, and more on the situation that they were in--almost completely nude, so as to create erotic tension, or something. Like, she thinks the game is trying to derive a perverse sense of pleasure from desecrating their bodies while being a voyeur. It wasn't really about the violence itself.

Again, it was a terrible example and she even lost points from me for that. I can't really defend it.

Ah, okay. I'll watch the video you sent me later tonight and then report back here.