Quote from: Balbinus;222967That's not what you came back to me on at all Brian, you came back to me about my saying that political correctness gave something to people.

I was making fun of you. Since I'm afraid of work, that must mean those in favor of PC do work. Do work, and you get paid.

Get it?

Jerk

I fucking thought better of you than this Balbinus. And to find out you're just another ass.

Fuck you.

Quote from: Edsan;222972Engine: My best players have always been female, and who have never roleplayed before joining our groups.

Jackalope: My worst players have always been female, and who have never roleplayed before joining our groups.


Personally, the worst players I have met where both men and women who had never gamed before joining the group. I have also had some bad experiences with couples around the table; but my current group has one and they are ok people.

I don't think it's a gender issue. It's a personality / mental stability one. It comes down on what you are as a social person, regardless of your genitalia.

I agree with this for the most part; ime, though, weather or not someone has played before doesn't really factor in either. My worst, for instance, definitely all had plenty of experience.

Quote from: jgants;222965I'm late to the party, but I'll just say this - you can pry the use of proper English out of my dead, cold hands.  Third person singular of the neutral gender is "he" in proper English.

'Proper English' effectively means 'English as prescribed and taught by the Oxford / Webster's dictionary'.

But Oxford and Webster's, or 'academia' in general, don't believe in 'proper English' any more.

Common sense is the academia of 50 years ago.

I don't know exactly what Balbinus said or didn't say, Gleichman, but I know what I said and  I extrapolated from his post, so don't use my post as any evidence for your whiny desires for an apology.

Quote from: walkerp;222986I don't know exactly what Balbinus said or didn't say, Gleichman, but I know what I said and  I extrapolated from his post, so don't use my post as any evidence for your whiny desires for an apology.

Fuck the apology. Those come from people who are man enough to own up to what they say. And they only have meaning from the same.

You at least admit that you want me dead. You at least are honest. And while you are representative of the worse western culture has to offer, at least that puts you up over Bablinus.

Quote from: Jackalope;222952My worst players have always been female, and who have never roleplayed before joining our groups.

They are the reason I instituted the No Girlfriends rule in my campaign.  Got tired of my male players trying to stem off their girlfriends complaints that they didn't spend enough time together by bring her to a game.  I don't like having to explain which one is the D20 ten times a night.  Ruins my fun.

It sounds like the problem you have is "stupid* females," which is a subset of "females" which you - and your friends, who are dating them! - would do well to avoid at the gaming table. They are part of a larger set called "stupid people," and I recommend you give the whole group of them a pass, whatever attributes - like gender - they might possess in addition to being stupid.

I, of course, passing no judgment on stupid people, I just find my gaming enjoyment is minimized when they're somewhere else entirely. Austria, maybe. Or Cambodia. No, on second thought, I'd rather I was in Cambodia, and they were here.

*"Stupid," in this context, being something between "people I don't like" and "person who doesn't know which of the dice has 20 sides." You know, sucky people. Who are dumb.

Quote from: jgants;222965I'm late to the party, but I'll just say this - you can pry the use of proper English out of my dead, cold hands.  Third person singular of the neutral gender is "he" in proper English.  I have no inclination for the stupidity of political-correctness or the pointlessness of gender-inclusive writing.

Next thing will be some moron telling us we need to start using the terms "womyn" and "herstory" instead of "women" and "history" because its more gender-sensitive.  I say, take that crap back to the Women's Studies department and leave us sane people alone.

I, too, draw the line at "womyn" and "herstory".  

I used to be a real stickler for proper english and I still fight for some things (the misuse of "enormity" and "momentarily" being huge ones that stick in my craw).  But in learning french and living in a french society (where the language fight rages at a whole nother level), I have changed my tune and see that some part of language is a function of culture and society and as those things change, the language will with it. It is good to have a baseline structure for shared communication, but sticking rigidly to some things is a useless battle.

The internet alone has completely destroyed the old rule that you aren't supposed to turn nouns into verbs.

I mean we are supposed to be science fiction geeks.  Can we not move forward with the times?

Quote from: gleichman;222977I was making fun of you. Since I'm afraid of work, that must mean those in favor of PC do work. Do work, and you get paid.

Get it?

Jerk

Once carefully explained, I don't think that was apparent from your post.  Besides, I hardly think the right is the only place where entitlement thinking is to be found, it was just the one that was relevant to this thread.  I don't think entitlement thinking is a peculiar province of the left though, it's widespread in society.

I didn't incidentally say you were afraid of work, I think your objections are of another nature as it happens.  Going right back to my original post, I would have said that you were someone who has significant issues with how society has changed over the last century and a bit, would you really disagree?  I had the distinct impression you thought it had largely changed for the worse.

I consider you prejudiced on the subject of muslims, I don't on this one as it happens, if we must get personal.

Quote from: gleichman;222977I fucking thought better of you than this Balbinus. And to find out you're just another ass.

Fuck you.

As you will.  As a rule though, I'm never going to respond well to restatements of my views, something is always lost in translation and it tends to be something important.

Quote from: gleichman;222989Fuck the apology. Those come from people who are man enough to own up to what they say. And they only have meaning from the same.

You at least admit that you want me dead. You at least are honest. And while you are representative of the worse western culture has to offer, at least that puts you up over Bablinus.

You create positions for me, and then criticise me for not standing by them.

By all means quote my actual posts and insult me for them, insulting me for your restatements of what I said seems a tad random however.

QuoteNope. The Afghan tales, the hero is a white male. He's just super-tanned and has spent so much of his adult life in the desert, that he knows as much and more than the locals and can pass as one. I'm trying to remember his name, because I just finished them, but I can't.

Pretty sure the character you're thinking of is Francis Xavier Gordon also known as El Borak, but what you've missed is that Gordon works with other heroes who are not of European descent-Asians who are treated with as much respect as Gordon and display as much honor and courage.  And before saying "well they're just sidekick heroes" consider that at least one that I'm aware of appears in other Howard stories without Gordon.  

QuoteI'm just pointing out that the field is dominated by white males and a little variety is a good thing.

No, what you originially said was that ALL of Howard's villians were blacks or Arabs.  A claim so ridiculous that you've not mentioned it again.  And you've claimed that ALL of Howard's heroes are white men.  You've also claimed that Howard's writings are colored by racist overtones, with the caveat that Howard himself was not a racist.  Well, who wrote the stories?  The culture?  Either they're racists or not.  Now you've backed away from the "all white male heroes" claim and the charge of racism in Howards writing with "the field is dominated".

Quote from: walkerp;222986I don't know exactly what Balbinus said or didn't say, Gleichman, but I know what I said and  I extrapolated from his post, so don't use my post as any evidence for your whiny desires for an apology.

Brian has decided that I said he was afraid of work, which I didn't as it happens.

I did say that most people who use that particular complaint do so from a sense of entitlement, which I quite happily stand by (actually, which I'd much rather have left alone in accordance with Noisms request but which I wasn't permitted to).

I didn't say his stuff about him personally being afraid to work, which is a nonsense - I haven't the faintest idea of Brian's willingness or otherwise to work and have no view on that question.  I think Brian's objections come from an unusually comprehensive and IMO overly* consistent political stance which colours his worldview to a greater degree than most people are coloured by theirs, though not having met him I could of course be wrong in that.  

*Overly as I think the world is made up of special cases and exceptions, therefore I distrust too great a consistency in any political stance.

:emot-sissies:

Quote from: wulfgar;222995No, what you originially said was that ALL of Howard's villians were blacks or Arabs.  A claim so ridiculous that you've not mentioned it again.  And you've claimed that ALL of Howard's heroes are white men.  You've also claimed that Howard's writings are colored by racist overtones, with the caveat that Howard himself was not a racist.  Well, who wrote the stories?  The culture?  Either they're racists or not.  Now you've backed away from the "all white male heroes" claim and the charge of racism in Howards writing with "the field is dominated".

I think he backed off those claims as he realised they weren't sustainable, I do think one can sustain an argument for racism in Howard's work (though not that argument), but ideally I'd like to see it in a different thread if we bother to hash it out.

Quote from: Balbinus;222992Once carefully explained, I don't think that was apparent from your post.

Perhaps my anger could have clued you in to ask, but guess that's below you. Instead you deny and avoid.

And yet, even now that it's explained, you're still silent to me on the matter of my original objections. I assume you stand by your original statement as I have no other option.

And now you pull this out of your hat:

Quote from: Balbinus;222992I consider you prejudiced on the subject of muslims

And Balbinus is now willing to create a list of crimes for me.

I'm prejudice and I assume a racist bastard on the subject of muslims.

I'm against PC and thus have never worked a day in my life and feel everything is owed me.

What else to have to add to the list oh master mind-reader.

Quote from: Balbinus;222992I didn't incidentally say you were afraid of work, I think your objections are of another nature as it happens.  Going right back to my original post, I would have said that you were someone who has significant issues with how society has changed over the last century and a bit, would you really disagree?

Oh, I get a pass after all. No one else does of course. They get painted under the word "most".

And the rest of the paragraph basically says that I don't like PC because I don't like PC- except it's phrase in such as way as to cast that opinion in the light of 'past history, we've moved on'.

I'm soooo full of joy right now.

Quote from: Balbinus;222992As you will.  As a rule though, I'm never going to respond well to restatements of my views, something is always lost in translation and it tends to be something important.

I know you likely never learned this, but restating someone's view is a wonderful way of doing something called communication.

Your proper response would have been to correct the statement. Like So:

"No I don't think believing in PC makes one believe in work- why would you think I said that?"


Or stand by the statement:

"Yes I made an attack, many anti-pc types are afraid of work- I stand by it", "No, I don't include you personally, but I think  you're racist."


Instead you dodge, whine and avoid.

Quote from: wulfgar;222995No, what you originially said was that ALL of Howard's villians were blacks or Arabs.  A claim so ridiculous that you've not mentioned it again.  And you've claimed that ALL of Howard's heroes are white men.  You've also claimed that Howard's writings are colored by racist overtones, with the caveat that Howard himself was not a racist.  Well, who wrote the stories?  The culture?  Either they're racists or not.  Now you've backed away from the "all white male heroes" claim and the charge of racism in Howards writing with "the field is dominated".

I said all his heroes were white males, which they are.  Somebody please find me a story where the principal hero is not a white male.

I can't remember exactly what I wrote about the villains, but I don't think I said all the villains were non-white. There are tons of white major antagonists in his books.  But there is a strong theme of racial eugenics in his work that is very indicative of the general thinking at the time.  That theme manifests itself in negative depictions of non-whites.

Anyhow, Howard is just one of the writers of the fantasy genre that I know best.  But my overall point is that the genre is dominated by white male power fantasies and often depicts women and other races in stereotypical ways.  All I'm saying is that a movement to reverse that trend is a good thing and doesn't harm the existing white males in fiction in any real way that I can see.