Interesting points raised on the exploitative nature of the BLM movement.

Hail Satan.

What have you done with your lives in 2015 so far you bunch of fucking degenerates?

What is he a faggot?

No, you are.

Quote from: 外ギン AVIATION on August 31, 2015, 10:09:31 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on August 31, 2015, 10:01:46 PM

So, really, nothing that can't be solved by killing ourselves, essentially.

If I understand, it's more taking your punishments in step. Losing your friends in such ways may further put life into perspective in terms of what you need to do to live more godly as an individual and as a community.

Seems like an awfully subtle and pernicious way to put your life into 'perspective.'

Not to mention, not all people view it like that. People can take loss in various different, sometimes even tragic ways. I just don't see how a supposed all loving god could do something as abhorrent like that just to 'advance' a person.

Sounds like a utilitarian prick to me.

Quote from: 外ギン AVIATION on August 31, 2015, 09:44:29 PM

Quote from: Prime Snake on August 31, 2015, 09:40:53 PM

To be fair, evolutionary impulses can detract from a person's ability to think logically. See the huge discussion in Serious about the two female Rangers and why it would negatively affect combat performance to have mixed company in the field

That's not the contention he has though. Innate male protectiveness over the female is a separate biological impulse that affects unit cohesion.

Verbatim thinks that just having sexual inhibitions makes someone stupid, when it obviously doesn't.

Just trying to build bridges here, man. If you can't agree, understanding the other's perspective is the next best thing.

I understand the perspective completely. I think it's a disgustingly pathetic perspective to have but he's perfectly entitled to have it, and I never contested that.

1. It does not affect every aspect of my life. That is one gross exaggeration. It doesn't even affect my life in any noticeable way--for example--the monkey on my back still tells me that sex is fun and desirable. I allow the monkey to feed me these ideas every once in awhile, because it keeps me sane. But when it comes time to sit down and think about what we're doing on his planet, you have to recognize that everything that we do on this planet is shit. Most of all sex.

Your definition of 'shit' being subjective. Explain how sex being 'shit' has such damning and harmful consequences on the human populace besides referring to the tired old argument of "I personally find it disgusting" for the eleventy billionth time.

2. "Nobody cares"--which is why you're arguing with me about it.

Are you trying to say that I care? Not sure what this sentence is trying to convey really. Kind of a non sequitur if anything

3. You should still be offended by sexual gratuity. You have failed to explain why it doesn't and why you shouldn't.

I have. Most people agree that for something to be objectively offensive it has to extend to more than just the individual thought process of one person, namely you.

If there was evidence to suggest sexual gratuity convinced women into hypothetically speaking, killing themselves, then you would have a point, because it's a concrete issue that can be witnessed in the real world that doesn't just inhere with you.

Simply announcing your disgust over something is not a viable justification for something to be intrinsically 'offensive.'

Oh wow, so I guess that was your ebin 'shredding' huh? Step it up senpai.

None of which is required for exploitation to occur.

Never made that proclamation. There is a fine gradient over what constitutes 'exploitation.' We exploit the natural resources of the Earth to power our technology. We exploit the weather to cultivate agriculture. None of which is morally reprehensible, and using scantily clad, mostly fictional people to generate revenue isn't either.

Check again. If you're able to accede the notion that having children represents no ethical transgression whatsoever, then, uh, you're fucking stupid. And yes--that means 99% of the human race is fucking stupid. Deal with it.

I'm not talking about reproduction. We already have the technology and means to subvert a potential pregnancy considering most sex involves contraception.

I'm talking about the biological rewards of engaging in sexual intercourse. There is nothing immoral about it.

It becomes sexist when you start catering to specific genders.

Considering it applies to both genders, it really isn't.

There are fast food commercials in America right now that use sweaty, scantily clad women to sell burgers, and it's abhorrently sexist

And there are yoghurt commercials depicting muscle imbued hulks with the intention of getting women's pussies frothing. What the fuck is your point.

because it assumes that all men are just mindless fucking drones who will only buy something if they see a hot woman doing it.

They kind of are tbh.

Or if it's associated with sex in ANY way. And it does this while exploiting the female form--which is dastardly in itself.

Oh my fucking christ, please explain how this 'exploitation' inflicts damage to fucking ANYONE. Literally anyone.

Quote from: PSU on August 31, 2015, 09:11:23 PM

God has a plan.

Sure does. It's just hard to understand why it is what it is sometimes.

Not to derail the thread or anything, unless you want the discussion to divert this way, but what exactly could a plan that has someone undergo a malignant, incurable tumour be at all beneficial to a human being?

Why exactly would an all benevolent god put a sentient creature, particularly something as emotionally prone as we are, through an ordeal like that?

To get us through to Heaven? Okay, why doesn't he encourage us all to kill ourselves then?

So don't click the spoiler tag, munchkin.

What do you think I've been doing for the past 10 replies now?

Do you want to talk about the definition of a word? I thought we all passed that stage when we were 5.

Because I don't think there's any logical reason for you NOT to be offended by sexual gratuity. None at all. Explain to me the logical reason why it's irrational to be offended by sexual gratuity. And I will shred you apart.

It's irrational to be offended by sexual gratuity and then taking it to the extreme where it literally consumes every aspect of your life.

Be offended by sexual gratuity all you fucking want. Nobody cares. It isn't your prerogative to posit the notion of 'boycotting' because it personally makes you feel uncomfortable for a couple of minutes.

It takes a lot to offend me, but like the majority of rational thinking people, if something does offend me I think about it for a couple of minutes then move the fuck on with my life. Being offended pertains to you. It is YOUR personal problem. Not mine. Not anyone else. This is not a difficult concept.

It's called exploitation. In case you didn't know, that's a bad thing. Axiomatically.

You have a very broad idea of what constitutes 'exploitation' if it's simply using a fictional character based on the anatomy of a female in order to sell a product.

Nobody is being coerced into this.

Nobody is being harmed by this.

There is no moral imposition being perpetrated here. Whatsoever. It is once again, a subjective issue that exists within you.

Because you're idiots.

Being born a normal human being doesn't make someone an idiot.

Everyone else is a fucking retard, then. Get the fuck over it.

Evolutionary impulses does not affect intelligence last I checked.

Either you think sexism is bad, like me.
Or you think sexism is okay. Like you.

Explain to me how using sex as a marketing tool is sexism.

Go on.

I'll be making a cuppa in the process munchkin.

I choose the former position, because I'm not fucking insane.

Exactly something an insane person would say.

The fact that you're arguing with me means that you're trying to dissuade me from my position. That is how arguments work.

Literally what I just said.

The difference however, is that you seem to think I'm coercing you into this position. I'm not. Continue to be a facile husk of a human being all you want. It's no skin off my nose. It would be great to have one less sociopath that holds such juvenile views in the world, but I know I'm being fairly unrealistic.

irrelevancies

Yeah, I think that's an apt description to this wall of text.

Look, I really don't care what you want to categorise it as, and typing out multiple meandering paragraphs over the semantics of a word really just tells me you're using this as a tactic to avoid the points I'm trying to say. Calling me 'dumb cunt' as if that is an appropriate thing to say during a conversation, ad hominem or not, is extremely juvenile.

So now that you've gotten the condescension out of your system, do you actually want to discuss this like, I don't know, adults for once?

Sure.

Interesting perception of the female anatomy you have there.

Literally the only person who doesn't know what a fucking ad hominem is here is you. It's not an insult--get over it. It's an insult intended to discredit an argument. Calling someone a "dumb cunt" doesn't make any attempt at discrediting an argument. If I said, "you're wrong, based on the fact that you're likely fat and ugly," that would've been an ad hominem. This isn't difficult.

Okay, so now that you've done describing me the definition of a word, care to engage in the actual topic at hand?

I'm actually not doing that at all. In fact, I explicitly stated that I don't believe sexism in games causes sexism in real life. I mean, I had to have said it at least three or four times by now, but you know.

Oh so we agree that there isn't a problem then. Brilliant.

So what exactly is your contention here if sexism in gaming does not cause sexism in real life? Or is this just another personal quibble you have that is categorically exclusive to you?

I guess that's all anti-fems are capable of: Putting up strawmen and knocking them down. But that only gets you so far.

You literally just had a temper tantrum over the definition of a word in an attempt to stray from the actual discussion at hand. You are in absolutely no place to be taking the intellectual high ground.

Oh it'd also be fantastic if you could address my first two initial points referring to my academic study which you have conveniently elected to ignore for the past, let's say, five posts now.

No, I generally don't have any business rebuking counterarguments to a claim pigeonholed into my philosophy by someone who doesn't actually understand what I'm trying to say.

I never claimed to have 'pigeonholed' anything. I asked you to prove your assertions and so far I've been called at least six infantile remarks and given half a dissertation about the definition of a word.

If that was too sophisticated/intellectual for you:

Not at all good gentlesir, I am proficient in the writings of Richard Dawkins myself. Please excuse me while I go polish my katana.

I have no business refuting arguments that I agree with. That doesn't seem very smart.

It also doesn't seem very smart to argue like a child having a playground spat either.

You were the one who had to make a big thing about it--calling me a "retard of the highest calibre" for doing something that I wasn't actually doing. You phrased your fucking question poorer than you're likely to be in the next ten years--I apologize for responding to it exactly how you worded it.

It was a simple question, but if it you really found it that difficult to grasp I'll water it down for you.

Sxc women, bad or no bad?

Hope that's more digestible for you. I'd appreciate an answer that didn't direct me to an irrelevant wikipedia page too.

Treating women like objects is disgusting. Women are not objects. Neither are men--they shouldn't be objectified, either. We are complex, intelligent, and nuanced.

I don't see this in gaming. They are objectified to an extent in order to increase sale prices, sure, but Lara Croft, Bayonetta, and Samus aren't just inanimate fucking constructs that exist solely to sexually gratify consumers. They too are complex, intelligent and nuanced characters with backstories, aspirations and feelings that goes along with good character development. If you take a solitary minute to look past the sexualization facet you would probably realise this.

Under no rationale could it ever be justifiable to include a character in a game that so irreverently caters to our most carnal desires

Good thing that they're not then.

unless it was supposed to be some kind of parody--but even then, we've already fucking done that shit. We know how ridiculous our sexualities are. We don't need any more reminders. It's time to move on to bigger, better, and more mature things.

The only reminder we don't need is the fact that you are unable to understand how market forces operate.

That's a basic primer, and I could go on and on.

I think the general consensus here is that you best not.

Why SHOULDN'T sexualization offend you?

Because it's harmless. Why would something harmless offend me? More to the point, why would something so primordially natural be something that offends me? I'm not ashamed of my sexuality, are you? Why it is so fucking affronting to have sex be used in something that entertains people?

I knew you were an emotionally castrated buzzkill, but Christ, I can find more humanity in a fucking Amish community.

Why should I NOT be offended?

I never said you weren't, and it would be lovely for you to point out where I said that you shouldn't.

You're perfectly entitled to be offended. Hell, I'm offended by your very presence on this forum. You don't see me actively trying to denounce your existence.

Why should I be like you? What will it bring me?

Getting a bit existential are we?

Yeah. Why would I attempt to mention some alternate perspectives for the sake of discussion? How silly of me.

It helps if the perspective you hold actually knows what it's talking about, instead of just saying "hurr durr I don't know so I'll commentate on it anyway."

dumb cunt

Genuine question, can you actually engage in a discussion without regressing into ad hominem? Is it really that difficult?

Poor portrayals of women affects the game's quality, because it subjugates women.

So, something that you personally find problematic, again.

That's my argument.

It helps the 'argument' by not injecting subjectivity into it.

It doesn't matter that no one is actually hurt. No other type of bad game design hurts anyone. I can still complain about it.

Yes, you can. Doesn't make your complaints any more warranted or your arguments any more sound.

Try using your brain this time around. Okay?

"If I resort to snarky, condescending ad hominem attacks, my argument will come off as less of the shitshow that it actually is"

Not if you can't demonstrate why sexism is okay.

Because fantasy and reality are, funnily enough, vastly different things.

1. You're a retard of the highest "calibre" by THINKING I was conflating the two.

I wasn't.

It was a counterexample.

I asked you what the repurcussions of objectification were and you give me a wikipedia link to the Atlantic Slave trade.

I really don't think I need to teach you about the ethical repercussions of treating people as objects. I really don't.

lmao

Do you know what that is?

I'm not sure you know yourself tbh.

No. Explain to me why I shouldn't find it "personally icky" and why you don't find it "personally icky".

Because it's a personal fucking problem YOU hold, not me, and not everyone else.

Because you should find it "personally icky".

And yet I don't, because I'm not an over-sensitive manchild.

If you deny the gender wage gap you may as well deny global warming, too

fucking idiots

It's not so much that the gap exists, it's where and how the data is collected that most people take umbrage with.

If you're going to analyse an economic gap with such broad church, asinine tendencies that don't reflect the choices women make then you can pretty much reach any kind of conclusion you want about the wage gap.

Quote from: unironically being ironic on August 31, 2015, 11:50:31 AM

What are the wider sociocultural repercussions of treating women as 'objects'?

Does it affect men too seeing as how objectification of men is almost as prevalent?

What exactly are your solutions to this alleged problem?

None of this is addressed throughout the entire 33 minute video.

The whole problem with the objectification argument is that it treats a non issue as if it's an actual issue.

Okay, fictional women are being used as sexual tools to get men to buy something. Are they being coerced? Does it harm actual women in real life? I really don't see any problems or solutions that can arise from objectification besides telling people to grow some thick fucking skin.