TheRPGSite

*NOTE first off if this should be in another section move it don't wack it


ok this happen with in the last few weeks and i only just heard of it i felt it might interest some of the rest of you  (rather embarrassing to me as im normally the 1st to hear of this stuff)(

France was looking at making a counsel to review video games and if they where deemed sexist to make then the equivalent of ADULTS ONLY
i first heard about it in this vidieo *NOTE we are NOT hear to talk about Anita Sarkeesian
[video=youtube;PmcIUP4Sc6o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmcIUP4Sc6o[/youtube]

now we did get lucky and this was voted down but this is a scarry event in any case
http://www.dualshockers.com/2016/01/23/law-against-sexist-video-games-rejected-in-france-proponent-blasts-quantic-dreams-kara-and-more/
http://www.gamertics.com/france-thinking-of-giving-sexist-games-labeling/

It doesn't surprise me at all. Wherever there are vocal SJWs, there's going to be attempts to get the government to go all thought police/nanny state over whatever issue they're whining about at the moment. And when you've got a government or political party who leans authoritarian, well, . . . this is the kind of thing that happens. But yeah, thankfully it didn't pass. That would have been all kinds of stupid.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;906995It doesn't surprise me at all. Wherever there are vocal SJWs, there's going to be attempts to get the government to go all thought police/nanny state over whatever issue they're whining about at the moment. And when you've got a government or political party who leans authoritarian, well, . . . this is the kind of thing that happens. But yeah, thankfully it didn't pass. That would have been all kinds of stupid.

Yeah for real the part that bothered me was i didnt hear a damn thing till after it was voted on.
Just gos to show they like to act when the rest of us are busy with something else.

My wife was telling me just the other day she would consider buying an oppai mouse pad... :D

Quote from: 3rik;907216My wife was telling me just the other day she would consider buying an oppai mouse pad... :D

I think my sister would if it was the right character.

Quote from: kosmos1214;907241

Quote from: 3rik;907216My wife was telling me just the other day she would consider buying an oppai mouse pad... :D

I think my sister would if it was the right character.

Maybe we should encourage them a little bit, just for the hell of it, because this sjw shit is starting to get really annoying.

Quote from: 3rik;907275Maybe we should encourage them a little bit, just for the hell of it, because this sjw shit is starting to get really annoying.

yah really im getting sick of the shit

Quote from: kosmos1214;907404yah really im getting sick of the shit

My wife was looking into Genkai Tokki: Seven Pirates on Siliconera this morning and laughing her ass off. You might want to bring it to your sister's attention. It looks like something sjw will lose their shit over. :D

Quote from: 3rik;907440My wife was looking into Genkai Tokki: Seven Pirates on Siliconera this morning and laughing her ass off. You might want to bring it to your sister's attention. It looks like something sjw will lose their shit over. :D

Thanks ill give it a look.

1. Sexual Objectification: appeals to straight males

2. Sex Positivity: Same as number 1 but the viewer in question likes it.

Quote from: 3rik;907216My wife was telling me just the other day she would consider buying an oppai mouse pad... :D

I thought they were amusing but juvenile... until I rested my wrist on a friend's mousepad. My goodness! The "carpal tunnel I never knew I had" just deflated in glorious thanks immediately. They're so comfortable! Who knew silica gel 'cleavage' could be so therapeutic?

Quote from: Nexus;9077401. Sexual Objectification: appeals to straight males

2. Sex Positivity: Same as number 1 but the viewer in question likes it.

You are right in a sense it is a rather hypocritical statement.
Especially out of Lockstin though hes normally much beater spoken then this.

Quote from: Opaopajr;907997I thought they were amusing but juvenile... until I rested my wrist on a friend's mousepad. My goodness! The "carpal tunnel I never knew I had" just deflated in glorious thanks immediately. They're so comfortable! Who knew silica gel 'cleavage' could be so therapeutic?

I hope it's not too "therapeutic" otherwise you might need the "having trouble eating ice cream" versions.

Note: Following the Ebay links below are definitely NSFW and may cause you to lose that last shred of faith in humanity.

Spoiler

http://www.ebay.com/itm/3D-Mouse-Pad-LoL-Ahri-Boob-Wrist-Ecchi-Anime-Oppai-Ergonomic-Boobs-/262296598912
http://www.ebay.com/itm/3D-Mouse-Pad-League-of-Legends-Boob-Wrist-Ecchi-Anime-Oppai-Ergonomic-Boobs-/252291771903

Heads up all you final fantasy fans
The remake of ff7 is getting censored before its even made
Whats worse is the reason they give sounds like "we don't want to put up with sjw backlash.

[video=youtube;dwqGENLb1ws]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwqGENLb1ws[/youtube]

I don't play the FF games and I find that annoying.

Sometimes it may just be that there is more sensitivity to what is a pretty horrible game design.

I haven't played FF either, but if my imagination from that video is accurate, it's strikes me as essentially the "you have to do X to complete the railroad adventure", where X isn't something many people really want to even think about, and wouldn't know to expect when they bought the game. I get annoyed by this in several CRPG games, and just strikes me as awful design which deserves to be complained about as a bad design decision people are free to dislike and talk about their dislike about. Accordingly, I don't see this self-"censorship" and really a censorship problem as much as it is a design issue to consider. I support the right of game-makers to make awful games about whatever subject - I just don't recommend it, and reserve the right to complain and despise them for it.

In this case, what looks like "to complete the adventure you need to go to a brothel and get gang-molested" looks like a game-decision that would tend to get me to stop playing and/or make many public comments about how ridiculous that was.

It seems to me a lot like other games I can think of:

* Grand Theft Auto 3 - you need to do various awful crimes for the mob in order to get the city to fix various public transportation so you can even get to other parts of the city.

* Knights Of The Old Republic - you need to go dance with people in a bar. You need to participate in (win?) an annoying race sequence.

Quote from: Skarg;910957I haven't played FF either, but if my imagination from that video is accurate, it's strikes me as essentially the "you have to do X to complete the railroad adventure", where X isn't something many people really want to even think about, and wouldn't know to expect when they bought the game.

Not exactly.

This part of the game is a railroad, in that you have to perform a fetch-quest to get enough women's clothing so that Cloud can dress in drag to sneak into Don Corneo's mansion, along with Aerith, and rescue Tifa. However, the game only requires you to get one or two items to do that (I haven't played the game in well over a decade, so my memory is fuzzy here, but I believe it was just the dress and wig); that you can go around and continue to collect further feminine apparel - which is the only reason to go to the brothel - to improve the disguise is entirely optional. It's only done if you want Don Corneo to choose to spend the night with Cloud rather than Aerith or Tifa...which doesn't matter anyway, since no matter what happens the group's cover is blown and the story moves on.

In other words, the entire gay bar/brothel thing is an optional side-quest, and is there purely for amusement. It can be skipped entirely.

Quote from: Alzrius;910959Not exactly.

This part of the game is a railroad, in that you have to perform a fetch-quest to get enough women's clothing so that Cloud can dress in drag to sneak into Don Corneo's mansion, along with Aerith, and rescue Tifa. However, the game only requires you to get one or two items to do that (I haven't played the game in well over a decade, so my memory is fuzzy here, but I believe it was just the dress and wig); that you can go around and continue to collect further feminine apparel - which is the only reason to go to the brothel - to improve the disguise is entirely optional. It's only done if you want Don Corneo to choose to spend the night with Cloud rather than Aerith or Tifa...which doesn't matter anyway, since no matter what happens the group's cover is blown and the story moves on.

In other words, the entire gay bar/brothel thing is an optional side-quest, and is there purely for amusement. It can be skipped entirely.

Well there is the slight advantage of not having to fight 10+ goons but thats about it.
After all its an rpg fighting goons rather comes with the territory.

I figured the game would be rated and potential customers could read reviews, talk to people that played and take other steps to make an informed choice rather than censoring the game for everyone.

Quote from: Alzrius;910959...
In other words, the entire gay bar/brothel thing is an optional side-quest, and is there purely for amusement. It can be skipped entirely.

Oh ok, thanks. Now I know. :D (pause to stop laughing)

Quote from: Nexus;911207I figured the game would be rated and potential customers could read reviews, talk to people that played and take other steps to make an informed choice rather than censoring the game for everyone.

I think the Japanese game companies in particular have no real idea *why* the West loses its collective shit about certain things.  
Ass2Mouth and ChokeFucking porn - freely available anywhere
Nipple visible underneath a costume - EOTWAWKI

As a result, the westerners in the company tell them certain things, and so they make completely blind decisions, not really getting why, but knowing they'd rather not have their games be splashed across the general media as some kind of "ist".  They're starting to just ignore the western market for some games and not even release a version to non-Asian country zones.

Quote from: CRKrueger;911330I think the Japanese game companies in particular have no real idea *why* the West loses its collective shit about certain things.  
Ass2Mouth and ChokeFucking porn - freely available anywhere
Nipple visible underneath a costume - EOTWAWKI

As a result, the westerners in the company tell them certain things, and so they make completely blind decisions, not really getting why, but knowing they'd rather not have their games be splashed across the general media as some kind of "ist".  They're starting to just ignore the western market for some games and not even release a version to non-Asian country zones.

Good observation. Though old news the kerfluffle over the character Poison in Final Fight is a good example of this (and an amusing one, IMO).

Quote from: Nexus;911332Good observation. Though old news the kerfluffle over the character Poison in Final Fight is a good example of this (and an amusing one, IMO).

ROFL, yeah.

It's like Hobbits and Klingons, they might both like food and drink, but everything else is a complete mystery to the other and always will be.

Quote from: Nexus;911332Good observation. Though old news the kerfluffle over the character Poison in Final Fight is a good example of this (and an amusing one, IMO).

Do fill me in on this one, please.

Quote from: 3rik;911341Do fill me in on this one, please.

Hot fighting chick gets turned into transgendered post-op woman (ie. remove penis, make a vagina) for the Western version of the character while the Eastern version of the character is a transgendered pre-op woman (still has the frank and beans) who just (I fucking shit you not) is supposed to be tucking it under like Buffalo Bill in that scene from Silence of the Lambs.

All this, of course, with the actual game art of the character being a ridiculously hot, obviously non-surgically altered, anime female.

Actually, Poison (Roxy) started as cis-women in Japan, as women fighting in gangs was not a wholly foreign concept. (It's not a wholly foreign concept in the West either, but whatever.) The kerfuffle started when one Western SNES localization male playtester (that's right, just one) objected to any man hitting a woman. That was enough to throw a justification that Poison (Roxy) is a male transvestite (this later changed to transgenderism in both pre-op & post-op variants, as Japan really just doesn't care).

Never mind that these female characters were designed by Akira Yasuda to be a ganger woman, and to contrast the regular gang roster by moving more randomly, and was named by an unnamed staff woman in honor of the glam rock band (& nigh club). Never mind that Golden Axe, Streets of Rage, Street Fighter, Strider, and a whole litany of others already had women as antagonists (let alone protagonists) in both the arcades and console games. It was because of only one Western SNES localization male playtester — with whatever "chivalrous code," blind to the gaming world for at least over a decade — that this whole thing started.

So yes, one person can make a difference. You should see how much import material had to be chopped up, swapped about, or wholly erased due to American Puritanism. Homosexuality and transexuality don't even scratch the surface. Stupid Puritan USA norms involving where women can be or stay, how they (or their statues) can dress, what they can eat, drink, smoke, say... Needless to say we missed a lot (and spare us the red herring "but the pederastry! it's in all Japanese things!" and stay on topic).

Quote from: CRKrueger;911330I think the Japanese game companies in particular have no real idea *why* the West loses its collective shit about certain things.  
Ass2Mouth and ChokeFucking porn - freely available anywhere
Nipple visible underneath a costume - EOTWAWKI

As a result, the westerners in the company tell them certain things, and so they make completely blind decisions, not really getting why, but knowing they'd rather not have their games be splashed across the general media as some kind of "ist".  They're starting to just ignore the western market for some games and not even release a version to non-Asian country zones.

Not that its any diferent for us devs they dnt get the changes that have t be made too there games ether just look at what the creators of south park thought of the changes made to the stick of truth
NSFW
 

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuK6CZy5qaw

Its also worth pointing out that japan actually has some of the strictest laws regarding video game content.

NSFW

Spoiler

[video=youtube;I-GJzgzNPxE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVvmH1XL9iE[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-GJzgzNPxE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS6VzDlGaCU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EkU20AyXRA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK_MGfbm4UE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3WJ4WnBkf0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-GJzgzNPxE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOzvbGOGrTI

Quote from: 3rik;911341Do fill me in on this one, please.

These videos shows all the final fight changes in detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW69J9AXOqI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_v6E6qhLds

It's also worth pointing out...if you want to get your real-life ass kicked - start a fight with a ladyboy. Hell, you don't even have start the fight, they'll do it for you. If I wanted to create a fighting video game set in a realistic Asian setting - a ladyboy would be an absolute necessity. It wouldn't matter how feminine the character looked, the minute any kind of argument broke out they would be pulling out a well-worn and taped-up box-cutter and heading straight for your balls. Jesus...just ask a Thai sometime who the last person they want to face in a fight is - they will inevitably say 'a ladyboy'. Kathoeys, to coin a phrase, will fuck your shit up seven ways from Sunday.

Quote from: 3rik;911341Do fill me in on this one, please.

Opapjanr and others have given you the gist and you can imagine the years of outraged howling from every side of the argument witg accusations of homophobia, transphobia, gay bashing, sexism, endorsing "violence against women" etc etc.

It flared up again relatively recently when some original concept art for Final Fight was recovered with pictures of Poison allegedly not as "newhalf" (male to female pre op transgender) surfaced thus "proving" that's what she always meant to be.

Quote from: Kellri;911451It's also worth pointing out...if you want to get your real-life ass kicked - start a fight with a ladyboy. Hell, you don't even have start the fight, they'll do it for you. If I wanted to create a fighting video game set in a realistic Asian setting - a ladyboy would be an absolute necessity. It wouldn't matter how feminine the character looked, the minute any kind of argument broke out they would be pulling out a well-worn and taped-up box-cutter and heading straight for your balls. Jesus...just ask a Thai sometime who the last person they want to face in a fight is - they will inevitably say 'a ladyboy'. Kathoeys, to coin a phrase, will fuck your shit up seven ways from Sunday.

Huh, it was same story were I grew up. You did not want to start shit with transvestites, flamboyantly gay black men either. They'd been taking shit most of their lives and were good at dealing with and usually had some rage issues to work out.

Quote from: Kellri;911451It's also worth pointing out...if you want to get your real-life ass kicked - start a fight with a ladyboy. Hell, you don't even have start the fight, they'll do it for you. If I wanted to create a fighting video game set in a realistic Asian setting - a ladyboy would be an absolute necessity. It wouldn't matter how feminine the character looked, the minute any kind of argument broke out they would be pulling out a well-worn and taped-up box-cutter and heading straight for your balls. Jesus...just ask a Thai sometime who the last person they want to face in a fight is - they will inevitably say 'a ladyboy'. Kathoeys, to coin a phrase, will fuck your shit up seven ways from Sunday.

Oh defiantly iv run in to a few never had any problems mostly because im smart enough not to open my big gob and start any thing.

Ok heres a new one as some of you my know espn recently broadcast the street fighter 5 evo tournament.
Now for a short history espn has all way been some what hostel toward the esports seen and for a long time refused to carry any esports material.
And the only reason they have started to is because it was drawing so meany viewers that they could no longer ignore it.
For example some of the bigger esports tournaments are drawing viewer ship in similar ranges to NFL and MLB games.
One of the big differences it that as these have historically not been broadcast on tv there in no incidental viewer ship the people watching it have had to seek it out.
Now one of the players who plays rmika was forced to use a different costume then he had in previous matches.  
Now as we know people involved in any sort of competitive competition have been known to have there own rituals for luck. As some one who plays video games competitively i can honestly admit i can happen here to after all i know i have mine.
As you can see in the video he is visibly bothered by something i cant say what it is for sure but it brings the entire tournament under scrutiny.
Even if it wasn't the costume selection it self what kind of brow beating did they give him???
And then you have to ask did this in some way affect the out come of the match???  
For that matter would they tell an NFL team that they cant have a player where that uniform its to sexy????
Or put there cheerleaders out because they are to sexy????
I doubt it.
Its also worth remembering that the game is rated T for teen meaning that its content is considered safe for thoughts 13 and up by the esrb.
And thats not including all the other censorship that has gone on since the games release.
[video=youtube;UsqV2OThd8w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsqV2OThd8w[/youtube]

Ok its been a while since i posted an up date in this thread and i dont have a lot of time iv got more to post then this about overwatch but this takes the cake and needs to be seen .

(http://i.imgur.com/GSmfnKj.png?1)

Quote from: kosmos1214;911523Ok heres a new one as some of you my know espn recently broadcast the street fighter 5 evo tournament.
Now for a short history espn has all way been some what hostel toward the esports seen and for a long time refused to carry any esports material.
And the only reason they have started to is because it was drawing so meany viewers that they could no longer ignore it.
For example some of the bigger esports tournaments are drawing viewer ship in similar ranges to NFL and MLB games.
One of the big differences it that as these have historically not been broadcast on tv there in no incidental viewer ship the people watching it have had to seek it out.
Now one of the players who plays rmika was forced to use a different costume then he had in previous matches.  
Now as we know people involved in any sort of competitive competition have been known to have there own rituals for luck. As some one who plays video games competitively i can honestly admit i can happen here to after all i know i have mine.
As you can see in the video he is visibly bothered by something i cant say what it is for sure but it brings the entire tournament under scrutiny.
Even if it wasn't the costume selection it self what kind of brow beating did they give him???
And then you have to ask did this in some way affect the out come of the match???  
For that matter would they tell an NFL team that they cant have a player where that uniform its to sexy????
Or put there cheerleaders out because they are to sexy????
I doubt it.
Its also worth remembering that the game is rated T for teen meaning that its content is considered safe for thoughts 13 and up by the esrb.
And thats not including all the other censorship that has gone on since the games release.
[video=youtube;UsqV2OThd8w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsqV2OThd8w[/youtube]

I'm unclear what you are defending here. (For that matter, I'm unclear what the commentator is defending here). You've got ridiculous misogynistic art / animations which have been toned down....unequally(?).

Are [you] upset that they have been toned down, or that they have been toned down badly?

I've never understood how a suggestive cartoon image of a gorgeous woman implies hatred of women. Or is misogynist another co-opted word, meaning 'anything ugly women don't like?'

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915045I've never understood how a suggestive cartoon image of a gorgeous woman implies hatred of women. Or is misogynist another co-opted word, meaning 'anything ugly women don't like?'

I'm not sure this deserves a sensible answer, but I'll try.

As a red-blooded male, I'm quite happy to see awesome and sexy depictions of women, even in cartoon form.

Even in a fighting game.

But these images aren't suggestive, they are caricatures. They are perverted depictions of women, not celebration of the female form.

That's why it's hateful. And as a male gamer it's frustrating to me that it's 2016 and we still can't get beyond this bullshit.

And you didn't answer my question. ;)

Quote from: Motorskills;915106They are perverted depictions of women, not celebration of the female form.

In your opinion.

You want to see a perverted depiction of women that indicates true hatefulness?  Check out pretty much any Picasso.  That's what hatred of women looks like--distorted monstrosities.

If you want to "get beyond" exaggerated sensuality found in video games marketed to young men who love looking at pretty girls, you better get back to Candy Crush.  Or, make your own game and stop your pearl-clutching virtue signaling.

And to answer your question, If I had purchased the game I'd be pissed that they had been toned down at all.  Vive la difference!

My local street artist would be interested to know that his caricatures are hateful.

Quote from: One Horse Town;915125My local street artist would be interested to know that his caricatures are hateful.

So would many of the woman artists I've know.

Or is this a 'only bad when men do it' thing?

Quote from: Warboss Squee;915138So would many of the woman artists I've know.

Or is this a 'only bad when men do it' thing?

No, there was plenty of shit talked about Bayonetta, despite her design having been made by a woman.

It's just a new manifestation of the old "I have the ability to respect opinions that differ from my own, but these opinions are different; they cross a (conveniently undefined) line to the point where the only conscionable response is to attack them" bullshit.

Quote from: One Horse Town;915125My local street artist would be interested to know that his caricatures are hateful.

Caricatures are not inherently hateful, of course not. Hell, one can buy caricatures of oneself if one wants.


And it's not (simply) a matter of artistic license, it's a matter of intent. And that's what terrible.

Quote from: Motorskills;915188Caricatures are not inherently hateful, of course not. Hell, one can buy caricatures of oneself if one wants.


And it's not (simply) a matter of artistic license, it's a matter of intent. And that's what terrible.

Intending to exaggerate the sensuality of a character to be more attractive to your target market is not terrible.  It's smart.

Of course you can read people's minds so you know their intent is HATEFUL anyway, right?

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915192Intending to exaggerate the sensuality of a character to be more attractive to your target market is not terrible.  It's smart.

Of course you can read people's minds so you know their intent is HATEFUL anyway, right?

If I drive 100mph past a kid's school, so I can deliver beer to my mates on time, my behaviour is hateful, even if my audience loves the end product.

Quote from: Motorskills;915195If I drive 100mph past a kid's school, so I can deliver beer to my mates on time, my behaviour is hateful, even if my audience loves the end product.

So you're reduced to "WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!"

The train is fine.

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915210So you're reduced to "WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!"

The train is fine.

Rosa Parks would have been proud of you, standing up for freedom like that. The rest of us can pack up and go home! :)

Quote from: Motorskills;915040I'm unclear what you are defending here. (For that matter, I'm unclear what the commentator is defending here). You've got ridiculous misogynistic art / animations which have been toned down....unequally(?).

Are [you] upset that they have been toned down, or that they have been toned down badly?

A bit of both plus the fact that espn is giving these guys crap they would never give to any other form of sports.

Quote from: Alzrius;915149No, there was plenty of shit talked about Bayonetta, despite her design having been made by a woman.

It's just a new manifestation of the old "I have the ability to respect opinions that differ from my own, but these opinions are different; they cross a (conveniently undefined) line to the point where the only conscionable response is to attack them" bullshit.

Bingo talk to my sister about this kind of thing that pisses my sister and me off to no end.
The sjw bull shit is so far out of line at this point its pathetic.

It's just a way for some Atheists or non-religious to have a Black and White line, a way to always have an Evil to destroy and defeat.
Who ever said you needed a deity or even a religion to have Religious Fundamentalism?

My wife told me the other day about some game being banned in Germany when she has no idea what for. "MeiQ" or something. Anyone here know what this is about? Also Criminal Girls 2.

Quote from: Alzrius;915149No, there was plenty of shit talked about Bayonetta, despite her design having been made by a woman.

My wife happens to love Bayonetta. It's one of her favourite games. She considers it incredibly fun. What do SJW have to say about people like her? Brainwashed?
I'm not that avid a button masher myself, but from looking at it I thought the game looked incredibly stylish and unique, kind of like a baroque superhero comic.

Quote from: 3rik;915791My wife told me the other day about some game being banned in Germany when she has no idea what for. "MeiQ" or something. Anyone here know what this is about? Also Criminal Girls 2.

Did she mean Valkyrie Drive: Bhikkuni (http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/)? Because that's the only other recent game that I'm aware of that Germany banned. (Which I suppose wasn't that surprising, considering that they've been ban-happy on the fan-service games lately, and this was a game whose tagline was "Weaponized lesbians! Powered by orgasms! What a time to be alive!")

EDIT: Whoops, I should read the article I linked to more closely. It looks like there is a game called MeiQ: The Labyrinth of Death (http://techraptor.net/content/meiq-labyrinth-death-refused-classification-australia) that was banned for being too sexy, but in Australia, not Germany (at least that I can find with some quick Googling).

QuoteMy wife happens to love Bayonetta. It's one of her favourite games. She considers it incredibly fun. What do SJW have to say about people like her? Brainwashed?
I'm not that avid a button masher myself, but from looking at it I thought the game looked incredibly stylish and unique, kind of like a baroque superhero comic.

Damned if I know. "Internalized misogyny" was their go-to for women who didn't agree with them for a while, but I suspect that now they'd say some bullshit about her privilege preventing her from realizing the harm that the male gaze was doing to women...or some other drivel.

By the way, your wife knows that there's a Bayonetta 2, right? (Albeit only for the Wii U.)

Quote from: Alzrius;915798Did she mean Valkyrie Drive: Bhikkuni (http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/)? Because that's the only other recent game that I'm aware of that Germany banned. (Which I suppose wasn't that surprising, considering that they've been ban-happy on the fan-service games lately, and this was a game whose tagline was "Weaponized lesbians! Powered by orgasms! What a time to be alive!")

The game is called MeiQ, but we haven't been able to find out why they're banning it. They're also putting a ban on Criminal Girls 2, probably because it's somewhat naughty. I'm just happy for my wife that we don't live in Germany, haha.

Quote from: Alzrius;915798Damned if I know. "Internalized misogyny" was their go-to for women who didn't agree with them for a while, but I suspect that now they'd say some bullshit about her privilege preventing her from realizing the harm that the male gaze was doing to women...or some other drivel.

Her privilege as a female gamer? I don't get it.

Quote from: 3rik;915800Her privilege as a female gamer? I don't get it.

My guess would be that anyone who isn't concerned about whatever they're up in arms over is "privileged," since obviously only someone who hasn't suffered from the deleterious effects of the social injustice that such games promote would fail to disapprove of them.

...or something.

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915045I've never understood how a suggestive cartoon image of a gorgeous woman implies hatred of women. Or is misogynist another co-opted word, meaning 'anything ugly women don't like?'

SJWs and all their nonsense are the result of fuglies, basement freaks and the human trash of the outrage brigade all getting internet access. These fucktards aren't a millennial invention. They've been around, but previously they had no platform to promote their bullshit.  

But hey, freedom of speech, yadda yadda.

Censoring and banning stuff that lots of people want will totally work, especially when people use nebulous terms like "priviledge" and "internalized misogyny" to decry entertainment media. Some people are so fucking naïve.

Cartoonish, exagerated sexy women are not hateful to women. A certain manga artist that I used to love certainly was. His "erotic" manga was mostly images of women being tortured, cut into pieces and crying. THAT'S misogynistic. Fuck that guy.

(He did the series "Blade of the Immortal" back in the 90s I don't recommend looking up his "adult" books. VOMIT)

Quote from: Alzrius;915798Did she mean Valkyrie Drive: Bhikkuni (http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/)? Because that's the only other recent game that I'm aware of that Germany banned. (Which I suppose wasn't that surprising, considering that they've been ban-happy on the fan-service games lately, and this was a game whose tagline was "Weaponized lesbians! Powered by orgasms! What a time to be alive!")

EDIT: Whoops, I should read the article I linked to more closely. It looks like there is a game called MeiQ: The Labyrinth of Death (http://techraptor.net/content/meiq-labyrinth-death-refused-classification-australia) that was banned for being too sexy, but in Australia, not Germany (at least that I can find with some quick Googling).

You may well be correct.

Here's the article about Criminal Girls 2 on Siliconera:
Criminal Girls 2 Won't Be Released In Germany - Siliconera (http://www.siliconera.com/2016/08/05/criminal-girls-2-cancelled-germany/)

Quote from: Alzrius;915798By the way, your wife knows that there's a Bayonetta 2, right? (Albeit only for the Wii U.)

Yes, she was even considering getting a Wii U just for Bayonetta 2, haha.

Quote from: Alzrius;915798Did she mean Valkyrie Drive: Bhikkuni (http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/)? Because that's the only other recent game that I'm aware of that Germany banned. (Which I suppose wasn't that surprising, considering that they've been ban-happy on the fan-service games lately, and this was a game whose tagline was "Weaponized lesbians! Powered by orgasms! What a time to be alive!")

EDIT: Whoops, I should read the article I linked to more closely. It looks like there is a game called MeiQ: The Labyrinth of Death (http://techraptor.net/content/meiq-labyrinth-death-refused-classification-australia) that was banned for being too sexy, but in Australia, not Germany (at least that I can find with some quick Googling).



Damned if I know. "Internalized misogyny" was their go-to for women who didn't agree with them for a while, but I suspect that now they'd say some bullshit about her privilege preventing her from realizing the harm that the male gaze was doing to women...or some other drivel.

By the way, your wife knows that there's a Bayonetta 2, right? (Albeit only for the Wii U.)

For the sake of reference.
http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/
http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12013180/meiq-labyrinth-of-death-banned-australia
http://techraptor.net/content/censored-gaming-recap-15th-21st-august-2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQJUgVhbpDU

Quote from: 3rik;915856You may well be correct.

Here's the article about Criminal Girls 2 on Siliconera:
Criminal Girls 2 Won't Be Released In Germany - Siliconera (http://www.siliconera.com/2016/08/05/criminal-girls-2-cancelled-germany/)


Yes, she was even considering getting a Wii U just for Bayonetta 2, haha.

In related news God Eater Resurrection is going to get censored in the US and Europe apparently And surprisingly in a US released game for violence more specifically blood.  
http://techraptor.net/content/author/cgaming
And its sounding like tekken will have the swimsuit costumes in the western release its nice to know the sjws dont always win.
http://techraptor.net/content/censored-gaming-recap-15th-21st-august-2016

Quote from: kosmos1214;916038For the sake of reference.
http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/valkyrie-drive-bhikkhuni-refused-rating-in-germany-following-australian-ban/9910/
http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12013180/meiq-labyrinth-of-death-banned-australia
http://techraptor.net/content/censored-gaming-recap-15th-21st-august-2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQJUgVhbpDU

Thanks for these, but I have to say...linking to Polygon? Really? They're an exceptionally biased site that pushes an SJW agenda; if you have to link to them, please us an archive.is of their pages so they don't actually get the clicks.

Random thought:  Anyone remember Dead Or Alive Beach Volleyball?

I mean, here is a game so throughly tailored to the young adolescent male mind (and it was GLORIOUS!!!), that it had breast jiggle physics specifically designed for it (and then fucked up in DOA:BV2, when they decided more jiggle was better and now each boob was its own semi-sentient eldrirtch horror bent on world domination... and I'll remind you each character has TWO!).


Its enduring popularity, however, was with women. Mothers and daughters would play it together.

Why?

Because they loved the social aspects of the gifting mechanics and the collecting of cute (skimpy) outfits.  

Guys? They liked it for a while, then went and watched porn.

Quote from: Spike;916074Random thought:  Anyone remember Dead Or Alive Beach Volleyball?

Remember it? We're now about to be able to fondle the girls (http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/08/dead-or-alive-xtreme-3-vr-video-reveals-butt-poking-and-boob-gazing/10681/) in virtual reality.

QuoteIts enduring popularity, however, was with women. Mothers and daughters would play it together.

Why?

Because they loved the social aspects of the gifting mechanics and the collecting of cute (skimpy) outfits.

Huh. I never heard of that before.

Quote from: Alzrius;916080Huh. I never heard of that before.

I suspect that's because it occurred rarely at best. ;)

Quote from: Alzrius;916061Thanks for these, but I have to say...linking to Polygon? Really? They're an exceptionally biased site that pushes an SJW agenda; if you have to link to them, please us an archive.is of their pages so they don't actually get the clicks.

Huh didnt know that thanks for the heads up ill try to keep it mind in the future though ill likely slip up from time to time as at times my posts are rather rushed.

Quote from: Spike;916074Random thought:  Anyone remember Dead Or Alive Beach Volleyball?

I mean, here is a game so throughly tailored to the young adolescent male mind (and it was GLORIOUS!!!), that it had breast jiggle physics specifically designed for it (and then fucked up in DOA:BV2, when they decided more jiggle was better and now each boob was its own semi-sentient eldrirtch horror bent on world domination... and I'll remind you each character has TWO!).


Its enduring popularity, however, was with women. Mothers and daughters would play it together.

Why?

Because they loved the social aspects of the gifting mechanics and the collecting of cute (skimpy) outfits.  

Guys? They liked it for a while, then went and watched porn.

My sister loves the doa xtream games i have paradise and iv got like 15 hours in it my sister has like 80.
by the way she also a fan of your posts.

Quote from: Spike;916074Random thought:  Anyone remember Dead Or Alive Beach Volleyball?

I mean, here is a game so throughly tailored to the young adolescent male mind (and it was GLORIOUS!!!), that it had breast jiggle physics specifically designed for it (and then fucked up in DOA:BV2, when they decided more jiggle was better and now each boob was its own semi-sentient eldrirtch horror bent on world domination... and I'll remind you each character has TWO!).


Its enduring popularity, however, was with women. Mothers and daughters would play it together.

Why?

Because they loved the social aspects of the gifting mechanics and the collecting of cute (skimpy) outfits.  

Guys? They liked it for a while, then went and watched porn.

Heh. My wife bought that one so we could play it together. I don't like sports games thought, so we went back to fighters. I think it's still collecting dust on my shelf.

Ok a while back i said i had more on overwatch now for the most part its all pretty tame with overwatch no massive censorship issues and blizzard has done a good job of holding there ground as a whole but there have been a few things so lets take a look at them.
So of the handful of things that have been censored the 1st was way back in the beta there was an out house on the route 66 map that had some consept art of some of the overwatch girls peeking out from under the door pretty simple pg13 sex joke if you ask me but some one didnt think so and it was removed its unclear if some one complained of if blizzerd changed there mind.
(http://i.imgur.com/D10ByKE.jpg)
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/ga5jmlqkt8s9rnha90aj.jpg)

Now the 2nd one is a bit hoter Tracer has a victory pose called over the shoulder that placed her keester squarely in the middle of the screen.
And of coarse some guy went to the forums and wined about it Standard its to sexy type who ha and one of the guys who works for blizzard i cant remember his name lost his shit at the guy then his boss told him he was sorry and that they would change it.
(http://overwatch.blizzplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/tracer-victory-pose-2-over-the-shoulder.png)
At this point its hard to tell if blizzard actually caved to the sjw mob or not because in the interim of the we will change it announcement and it happening there was a "blizzard caved" backlash that may have been bigger then the sjw attack.
Now when the change came out Blizzard had changed it to match a rather famous pin up picture and the sjws ragged and dont seem to have gotten any where since on the issue.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/aQ5-MIgAnQ4/maxresdefault.jpg)
*video of the story (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sG_-9F2QEk)
Its worth pointing out that both poses fit her character and personality.

Now the 3rd one is back to the over watch petition i posted back on page 4.
(http://i.imgur.com/GSmfnKj.png?1)
This is actually kind of interesting as it was started as a joke to make fun of the sjws and in truth it is still rather scary given the number of people who seem to have signed it legitimately buying in to it thinking they could push blizzard.

Ok this is the last one and i big one rather recently a Hindi Regulus leader had a fit about overwatch  degrading his religion because symmetra had 2 costumes based off one of the hindi gods.
(http://heatst.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/20160624114319symmetra_skin_devi.jpg)
*the other is a pallet swap*
Now if this sounds familiar it should he had the same shit storm about the moba smite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiPZFPYhmzs*sorry youtube has a short collective memory and its the only vid i can find*
Not this got the whole sjw nut ball rolling and they attacked in force accusing overwatch of quote "cultural appropriation"
for every thing from pharah's Raindancer skin to zenyatas Djinn skin
(http://orcz.com/images/thumb/e/e5/OverwatchPharahRaindancerSkin.jpg/600px-OverwatchPharahRaindancerSkin.jpg)
(http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/overwatch/images/7/71/Zenyatta_djinnyatta.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20160210013628)
Now this is scary if you ask me because what this amounts to is you represented a culture in some way we dint like and we are going to try and punish you for it standard sjw tactics but still worry some.
After all if you start that crap what it quickly turns in to is no one can use any cultural inspiration for any thing which leaves the entire world of fiction grey and bland.
Interestingly they said nothing about mccree as cultural appropriation.

Sweet baby Jesus

I like the fact that so many of these moral authoritarians are being pushed out of regular society so hard, that they're desperately clinging to interests that they perceive as 'full of weaklings'.  Like, the first thing out of their filthy stinking lips when the Gamergate thing happened was how gamers were all a bunch of 'fat neckbeards, living in their mothers' basements'.  Then they found out otherwise.

I'm waiting for some of these gaming companies to find an opportunity to sue these people for defamation or slander at some point- after all, a good chunk of what they've said has turned out to be outright fabrications.  Maybe when some of these Outrage Fetishists are sued to the point where they're begging on the street for a piece of cold chicken or a can of string beans, they'll finally be shuffled away from oblivion and become nonexistent.

Quote from: Crüesader;918358I like the fact that so many of these moral authoritarians are being pushed out of regular society so hard, that they're desperately clinging to interests that they perceive as 'full of weaklings'.  Like, the first thing out of their filthy stinking lips when the Gamergate thing happened was how gamers were all a bunch of 'fat neckbeards, living in their mothers' basements'.  Then they found out otherwise.

I'm waiting for some of these gaming companies to find an opportunity to sue these people for defamation or slander at some point- after all, a good chunk of what they've said has turned out to be outright fabrications.  Maybe when some of these Outrage Fetishists are sued to the point where they're begging on the street for a piece of cold chicken or a can of string beans, they'll finally be shuffled away from oblivion and become nonexistent.

And yet. And yet.

Check out Morgan Spurlock's Inside Man series, the recent episode "Game Changers" had him tagging along with two professional League of Legends teams, one male one female, to provide him (and us!) with an insight into that life. This link (http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/07/05/morgan-spurlock-inside-man-ep-5-game-changers-1.cnn/video/playlists/atv-inside-man-morgan-spurlock-curated/) provides some clips, I believe the full episode is available on YouTube, may or not be official.

Needless to say, the pro women had all experienced horrific abuse online, and get it every time they are recognisable online. Credit to them they pushed past, and are likely much better players than their abusers ever will be.


Does that mean that all game designers are misogynistic? That every male gamer is a bigot?

Of course not.

It also doesn't excuse the mis-steps and over-steps that the pro-reform campaigners have made.


Our society is lot freer, and a lot more open and relaxed than at almost any time in history. Mini-skirts don't shock. Sex Pistols' music is used in TV adverts. The internet enables pornography for all.
But our society is still riven with issues. Sexism is a big one. Every day we read yet another news story, Roger Ailes' ouster (http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/09/media/geraldo-rivera-fox-news-facebook/index.html) from Fox News is just the latest high-profile example.


Again, there's nothing wrong with pushing back against the mis-steps and over-steps that have been made.

But those celebrating this kind of imagery, believing themselves to be paladins of free speech, pushing back against 'moral authoritarians'? It's just weak sauce. Because there's definitely a significant Venn overlap between those that celebrate this imagery and those that enjoy the abuse of the pro-gamers I mentioned above.

Time for someone to make Sexy Hotpants Virgin Mary adventures, then? With special "3rd Person" POV cam, and enhanced butt-jiggle modeling technology?

Quote from: Motorskills;918812And yet. And yet.

Check out Morgan Spurlock's Inside Man series, the recent episode "Game Changers" had him tagging along with two professional League of Legends teams, one male one female, to provide him (and us!) with an insight into that life. This link (http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/07/05/morgan-spurlock-inside-man-ep-5-game-changers-1.cnn/video/playlists/atv-inside-man-morgan-spurlock-curated/) provides some clips, I believe the full episode is available on YouTube, may or not be official.

Yeah, no. Documentaries need to be taken with a major grain of salt, because by their very nature they're going to discard a lot of the footage they get in favor of what makes for the better story. As a general rule, a documentary should be taken in the same manner as a flyer or a pamphlet with regards to whatever issue they're examining; they're good for generating interest, but you should always follow them up with your own research rather than letting them do your thinking for you.

QuoteNeedless to say, the pro women had all experienced horrific abuse online, and get it every time they are recognisable online. Credit to them they pushed past, and are likely much better players than their abusers ever will be.

Insofar as online harassment goes, the Pew Research Center has found (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/) that not only are men more likely to experience it than women (44% for men vs. 37% for women), but this is also true for most (and the most prevalent) forms of harassment as well:

Called offensive names: men 32% / women 22%
Purposefully embarrassed: men 24% / women 20%
Physically threatened: men 10% / women 6%
Harassed for a sustained period: men 8% / women 7%
Stalked: men 6% / women 9%
Sexually harassed: men 4% / women 7%

Moreover, men are more likely (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/part-2-the-online-environment/) to experience this harassment specifically in the realm of online gaming than women are: men 21% / women 11%.

The real kicker, however, is that women are more likely to find harassment upsetting than men are. The breakdown of reactions (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/part-4-the-aftermath-of-online-harassment/) is as follows:

Extremely upsetting: men 9% / women 18%
Very upsetting: men 8% / women 20%
Somewhat upsetting: men 19% / women 24%
A little upsetting: men 33% / 26%
Not at all upsetting: men 31% / women 12%

In other words, framing the harassment as something specific to the female LoL team is notable only that they're in the minority of female gamers who not only received harassment, but didn't let it affect them very much.

QuoteDoes that mean that all game designers are misogynistic? That every male gamer is a bigot?

Of course not.

It also doesn't excuse the mis-steps and over-steps that the pro-reform campaigners have made.

That's kind of the point of this thread.

QuoteOur society is lot freer, and a lot more open and relaxed than at almost any time in history. Mini-skirts don't shock. Sex Pistols' music is used in TV adverts. The internet enables pornography for all.
But our society is still riven with issues. Sexism is a big one. Every day we read yet another news story, Roger Ailes' ouster (http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/09/media/geraldo-rivera-fox-news-facebook/index.html) from Fox News is just the latest high-profile example.

Our society has issues, and sexism is still an issue; but notwithstanding everyone's personal take on what the big issues are, it's debatable that it's "a big one." Part of this is because we have a lot of people diluting it by taking trivial instances where something bad happens to a woman - e.g. you can kill female characters in Grand Theft Auto V - and presenting that as being indicative of sexism being a "big issue."

You're not wrong to note the story with Roger Ailes. But for every one of those there's a Dr. Matt Taylor (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/shirtstorm) being made to weep on television because he happened to wear the wrong shirt while landing a satellite on a comet, and was called "the reason why women aren't welcome in STEM."

QuoteAgain, there's nothing wrong with pushing back against the mis-steps and over-steps that have been made.

Yeah, we know. That's what this thread is about.

QuoteBut those celebrating this kind of imagery, believing themselves to be paladins of free speech, pushing back against 'moral authoritarians'? It's just weak sauce. Because there's definitely a significant Venn overlap between those that celebrate this imagery and those that enjoy the abuse of the pro-gamers I mentioned above.

Trolls on the internet have a Venn overlap with everything. Postulating that gaming is somehow worse in this regard - without evidence, no less - is the real weak sauce.

Quote from: Alzrius;919084That's kind of the point of this thread.

Actually the point of this thread seems to be having a love-in that conflates pushing back against over-reach with promoting inappropriate treatment [of women].

The Pew poll is interesting. And AFAIK they are a respected organization.

I'll confess I only skimmed the first couple of pages of the report, but to a (very!) layman, the output looked solid. The problem however (unless it is covered in later pages), is that the report is talking about online harassment in general, and not harassment in the gaming world.

If the numbers were equally valid for both, you would have male players pretending to be female players, not the well-established other way around.

Quote from: Motorskills;919111The Pew poll is interesting. And AFAIK they are a respected organization.

I'll confess I only skimmed the first couple of pages of the report, but to a (very!) layman, the output looked solid. The problem however (unless it is covered in later pages), is that the report is talking about online harassment in general, and not harassment in the gaming world.

If the numbers were equally valid for both, you would have male players pretending to be female players, not the well-established other way around.

I skimmed it some more, and the numbers feel legit to me.

Gaming environments are addressed.

However I do think you are comparing apples with oranges here. 66% of folks experienced harassment in social media environments, only 16% reported harassment in gaming environments.

If you could run a reliable poll asking "out" women gamers whether they have experienced harassment, I would imagine the number would be approaching 100%. How many women choose to play under male or non-gender names to avoid harassment - more than a few I would imagine? How many male players deliberately hid their gender - a much smaller proportion.

Quote from: PewYoung women, those 18-24, experience certain severe types of harassment at disproportionately high levels: 26% of these young women have been stalked online, and 25% were the target of online sexual harassment. In addition, they do not escape the heightened rates of physical threats and sustained harassment common to their male peers and young people in general.

Bolding mine. Now note - those aren't young female gamers. Those are all young women (polled). And the bulk of those are being harassed in 'open' environments. How much worse must be it in 'closed' gaming environments?

I don't think that Pew data reinforces your position. It reinforces mine.

Then what do you propose should be done about 'harassment', oh White Knight?  Should we ban saying mean things to women?

Quote from: Motorskills;919108Actually the point of this thread seems to be having a love-in that conflates pushing back against over-reach with promoting inappropriate treatment [of women].

I don't agree; I'll confess that I haven't gone back and skimmed the thread, so maybe I'm missing something, but insofar as I recall no one is "promoting inappropriate treatment" of women. (A caveat being that female video game characters are not women; they're video game characters. Hence, the idea of treating them "inappropriately" is moot.)

Quote from: Motorskills;919111The Pew poll is interesting. And AFAIK they are a respected organization.

I'll confess I only skimmed the first couple of pages of the report, but to a (very!) layman, the output looked solid. The problem however (unless it is covered in later pages), is that the report is talking about online harassment in general, and not harassment in the gaming world.

If the numbers were equally valid for both, you would have male players pretending to be female players, not the well-established other way around.

The report covers harassment on the Internet in general, but it does talk about online gaming several times, albeit usually as part of a breakdown of some aspect of a given topic. For example:

• When sampling for where harassment took place, online gaming was the result only 16% of the time.
• This number climbs to 26% among 18-29 year-olds (rising to 34% if limited to males of this age bracket), and climbs even further to 31% when limited to 18-24 year-olds.
• When sampling for perceptions of what online "neighborhoods" were more welcoming to one gender or the other, online gaming was found to be 51% for "equally welcoming to both genders," 3% for "more welcoming to women," and 44% for "more welcoming to men." The former two scores were the lowest of the neighborhoods samples, whereas the latter was the highest. (2% was listed as "no answer" to this breakdown.)
  
• The numbers listed above were aggregates of the responses given by men and women. When limited to women alone, the number who believed that online gaming was equally welcome to both genders actually increased by a small amount, to 55%.
• Harassment in online gaming is more prevalent among younger people, being 26% likely for 18-29 year-olds, 10% likely for 30-49 year-olds, and 9% likely 50+ year-olds. These numbers are comparable to harassment in personal email accounts, (10%, 14%, and 28% respectively), but are far below the harassment on social media (74%, 70%, and 44% respectively).
• Social media was found to be where most harassment takes place: 59% for men and 73% for women. For online gaming, those numbers (mentioned previously) are 21% for men and 11% for women. Finally, the comments section of a website were 31% for men and 12% for women.

Quote from: Motorskills;91913866% of folks experienced harassment in social media environments, only 16% reported harassment in gaming environments.

Except the entire concept of "harassment" has become debased into "any comment I don't like"

Women want equality? Great! Men trash talk the fuck out of each other in competitive environments. Men break down other men every damn day.

Ladies, welcome to the mosh pit.

Quote from: Spinachcat;919144Except the entire concept of "harassment" has become debased into "any comment I don't like"

You also forgot it means "contesting a statement I've made".

Quote from: Motorskills;919138However I do think you are comparing apples with oranges here. 66% of folks experienced harassment in social media environments, only 16% reported harassment in gaming environments.

If you could run a reliable poll asking "out" women gamers whether they have experienced harassment, I would imagine the number would be approaching 100%. How many women choose to play under male or non-gender names to avoid harassment - more than a few I would imagine? How many male players deliberately hid their gender - a much smaller proportion.

You're making presumptions, with no data to back them up, to try and invalidate the results of data that doesn't match what you believe. I would strongly advise against doing this, as it's the hallmark of the "feelz not realz" argument that is held as typifying SJWs.

I won't say that the point you've raised isn't an interesting one, but given that we have no data (let alone reliable data) on it, I would recommend sticking with the reliable information that we do have, rather than holding forth with conjecture.

QuoteBolding mine. Now note - those aren't young female gamers. Those are all young women (polled). And the bulk of those are being harassed in 'open' environments. How much worse must be it in 'closed' gaming environments?

First of all, that's only worse when you limit it to women in the 18-24 age category. As the study notes, when you look at all ages, men are the ones who are harassed more often. Second of all, the data says how much women are harassed in gaming environments (I'm not sure what you mean by "closed"): 11%, which is almost half of the 21% of men who experience harassment in such environments.

QuoteI don't think that Pew data reinforces your position. It reinforces mine.

I don't believe that to be the case. You seem to be selectively interpreting the data via unsubstantiated presumptions regarding "out" handles in online gaming (which, I should note, seems to be limited to usernames and other textual input only, as opposed to voice-chatting where that would be much harder). You're also limiting your viewpoint to one age segment rather than the whole female population online, the latter of which I think is more salient. Finally, you're presuming that undefined "closed" environments are worse, despite that fact that we have a clear breakdown of the harassment that goes on in online gaming.

As such, the data doesn't seem to reinforce your position if you take away those presumptions and look solely at the information that's presented in the report.

Quote from: Alzrius;919147You're making presumptions, with no data to back them up, to try and invalidate the results of data that doesn't match what you believe. I would strongly advise against doing this, as it's the hallmark of the "feelz not realz" argument that is held as typifying SJWs.

I won't say that the point you've raised isn't an interesting one, but given that we have no data (let alone reliable data) on it, I would recommend sticking with the reliable information that we do have, rather than holding forth with conjecture.



First of all, that's only worse when you limit it to women in the 18-24 age category. As the study notes, when you look at all ages, men are the ones who are harassed more often. Second of all, the data says how much women are harassed in gaming environments (I'm not sure what you mean by "closed"): 11%, which is almost half of the 21% of men who experience harassment in such environments.



I don't believe that to be the case. You seem to be selectively interpreting the data via unsubstantiated presumptions regarding "out" handles in online gaming (which, I should note, seems to be limited to usernames and other textual input only, as opposed to voice-chatting where that would be much harder). You're also limiting your viewpoint to one age segment rather than the whole female population online, the latter of which I think is more salient. Finally, you're presuming that undefined "closed" environments are worse, despite that fact that we have a clear breakdown of the harassment that goes on in online gaming.

As such, the data doesn't seem to reinforce your position if you take away those presumptions and look solely at the information that's presented in the report.

Well okay, I think you and I can have an adult conversation about this.

Can we agree that while the report is useful, the Pew data is nonetheless very limited in general, but especially so when it comes to online gaming harassment?

Can we agree that harassment is more readily inflicted when the harasser has anonymity? (Not to say that it is worse, I think the Pew report indicates that some "overt" stuff can be brutally scary and damaging).

Do we disagree that young women are disproportionately harassed when they are "open" in online gaming environments? Maybe so?
I presented data from the Spurlock documentary - now you are correct that documentary makers have an entertainment agenda, sure they do, but I also think it is a stretch to dismiss the lived experiences of this women who are entirely embedded within the gaming community.

I also stand by assertion that it is not uncommon for female players to deliberately choose to play behind male or gender-blank monikers, whereas it simply doesn't happen the other way around to any great degree. My data is involvement in gaming communities for decades. Not Pew-standard, sure, but not pulled out of my ass either.



My point?
I don't think [male] gamers stand up often enough to slap down their peers that inflict harassment, in any of its multiple forms. There's a bunch of reasons for that, some of those we can be sympathetic about.

But where I lose all sympathy is where the rejection is lauded, under the paper-thin banner of standing strong against those uppity feminazis and their censorship agenda.

Quote from: Motorskills;919151Well okay, I think you and I can have an adult conversation about this.

I'd like to think so. Certainly, it'd be nice to have a debate that didn't devolve into acrimony and name-calling for a change!

QuoteCan we agree that while the report is useful, the Pew data is nonetheless very limited in general, but especially so when it comes to online gaming harassment?

I do agree with you that it's useful, but my agreement is far more reluctant insofar as it being "very limited" goes. The data that's presented does seem to paint a fairly cohesive picture as to the overall distribution of harassment among ages, genders, and Internet venues. I do agree that the data doesn't go very deep into any further breakdown as to the circumstances of harassment in any particular online "neighborhood" as they call it, but I don't think that online gaming is "especially" limited compared to how the report treats, say, social media.

QuoteCan we agree that harassment is more readily inflicted when the harasser has anonymity? (Not to say that it is worse, I think the Pew report indicates that some "overt" stuff can be brutally scary and damaging).

Actually, I'm not sure that I do agree with you here. The report indicated that the bulk of harassment took place over social media, and social media seems (to my mind) to be more likely to make the harasser less anonymous. Most Facebook and Twitter accounts (again, in my perception) seem inclined to openly represent a particular individual or group, though there are certainly plenty of exceptions. By contrast, online gaming handles tend to be less inclined to present the user's real identity.

QuoteDo we disagree that young women are disproportionately harassed when they are "open" in online gaming environments? Maybe so?

Strictly speaking, if we limit this to both "young women" and "online gaming environments," then we do disagree. That's because the study doesn't, that I recall, break down any of its findings across those three categories - age, gender, and Internet venue - all at once, that I recall:

It's possible that I've overlooked something in the report, but while it indicates that young women (ages 18-24) in general experience certain types of harassment at disproportionate levels (e.g. 26% likely to experience stalking, versus 7% of men ages 18-24 and 8% of all Internet users regardless of gender or age; 25% likely to experience sexual harassment, versus 13% for men ages 18-24 and 6% of all Internet users regardless of gender or age), but that wasn't broken down by online environment.

Likewise, insofar as online gaming specifically went, it was perceived by 44% as being more welcoming to men, but 51% perceived it as equally welcoming to both genders (both were without regard to age). Likewise, women specifically perceived online gaming to be more welcoming to men only 40% of the time, versus perceiving it to be welcoming to both genders 55% of the time (again, without regards to age). Men, on the other hand, perceived online gaming to be more welcoming to men 49% of the time, and more welcoming to both genders only 40% of the time (again, without regards to age).

There was a breakdown of harassment by gender and Internet neighborhood - noting that men 21% likely to experience harassment in online gaming versus women being 11% likely to experience harassment in the same venue - but this wasn't broken down by age either.

Finally, there's a comparison of harassment on social media vs. online gaming vs. personal email accounts, but that only takes age ranges into account, not genders.

QuoteI presented data from the Spurlock documentary - now you are correct that documentary makers have an entertainment agenda, sure they do, but I also think it is a stretch to dismiss the lived experiences of this women who are entirely embedded within the gaming community.

I'm not dismissing their lived experiences. Rather, I'm maintaining that the data from the Pew study grants us information that is more holistic in scope, and therefore more reliable and useful, than the documentary. (This doesn't mean that the study invalidates their experiences either; quite the contrary, it's entirely possible to reconcile the two, as they might very well be part of the 11% of women who experienced harassment in online gaming.)

QuoteI also stand by assertion that it is not uncommon for female players to deliberately choose to play behind male or gender-blank monikers, whereas it simply doesn't happen the other way around to any great degree. My data is involvement in gaming communities for decades. Not Pew-standard, sure, but not pulled out of my ass either.

I don't doubt your good faith. But without evidence to support this, it remains an assertion, and because any single person's perceptions are necessarily limited, the utility that this brings to a debate is almost certainly going to be negligible. There's nothing wrong with an anecdote, but that's not evidence unto itself, simply because a single person's lived experiences are so unlikely to be representative of a larger whole (and worse, there's often no way to say for certain).

QuoteMy point?
I don't think [male] gamers stand up often enough to slap down their peers that inflict harassment, in any of its multiple forms. There's a bunch of reasons for that, some of those we can be sympathetic about.

Obviously we'd all like to see less harassment happening, but I think that the reasons for that (and for why it's not self-policed more) is highly nuanced, and can't wholly be relegated to people witnessing incidents of harassment, (correctly) identifying that what's happening is harassment, and simply not caring to do anything about it. As others have noted, there are numerous instances wherein something that one party might identify as "harassment" can be construed by someone else - in completely good faith - as not being harassment at all.

QuoteBut where I lose all sympathy is where the rejection is lauded, under the paper-thin banner of standing strong against those uppity feminazis and their censorship agenda.

Again, I think this is a continuum more than a dichotomy. While there are quite clearly things that cross the line, I do believe that there's legitimate grounds to say that there's very real good-faith disagreements over what constitutes harassment per se. Disagreement, mockery, insults, and even vitriol can have nuance in their use that can make it extremely subjective as to whether or not they're harassment.

Just a placeholder response Alzrius, I'm travelling and working like mad this week, and I want to give proper time to review your comments. :)

Hey, motorskills- look, I get it.  No one is cool with harassing someone in a game, no one is cool with threats.  But the issue tends to be a bit more complex.  This is what I see:

Some of these people call every little thing that bothers them 'harassment'.  Criticize their opinion?  Harassment.  Tell them they suck after you beat them in a duel?  Harassment.  Roleplay a character that takes a dislike to their character? Harassment. Give them an opinion that is contrary to their ideology, belief, or personal taste?  Harassment.  Flirt with a woman online, and since she lacks the intestinal fortitude to say she's not interested? Harassment. Give their product a negative review?  Harassment. Debunk their theories?  Harassment.  Make a dick/fart joke?  Harassment.  Respond to their insult with an insult?  Harassment.

Hey, I play my share of vidya games.  You know what I do when someone's bothering me?  I use the fucking ignore/block feature.  If that doesn't work, I report it to a GM/Admin and let them handle it.  Shit will happen, I promise you.  (The only exception I've seen is Facebook, where on one particular page there's a guy constantly stating that conservatives are 'traitors' that deserve to be shot or hung, and claims that their 'reckoning' is coming.  After reporting him several times, Facebook seems to find nothing against their terms and conditions policy... but say the word 'faggot', even in the context that "I find the word 'faggot' deplorable", and you'll be out for 30 days.)

No one deserves to get death/rape threats.  But at the same time, no gamer deserves to be lumped in with those making death/rape threats, just because he didn't pander to and kneel before someone.  Those people making those threats- how many of them do you honestly think are adults?  Take it from a guy that left the FPS games behind a long time ago- those are the squeakers saying vile shit in the headset because no adult is around to beat them or take away their electronics.  

The thing that these women keep forgetting is that every possible place for us to exchange ideas and play games together has some means to report people.  If you're getting legitimately harassed in a game, trust me- they'll fucking do something about it.  That loon may come back later on a new account, but he'll behave differently or the same thing will happen.  This has always been the case.  Think about that.  Now, with that being said:  Why, all of a sudden is harassment 'out of hand'?  It isn't because the places hosting gamers is slacking off.  It's because these fucking loons want anything that upsets them to be considered harassment.  

Dude, women didn't suddenly become gamers in 2013.  But during that time frame, we simply got a shitload of charlatans and hucksters looking to exploit maladjusted and disillusioned young outrage fetishists.  Tell someone they're a victim, and they will eat it up like candy.

I fucking hate SJW's and hipsters, and I openly identify as a leftist (I voted for Bernie Sanders in the Virginia Primary and intend to vote for Hillary Clinton in the general election this November). It's pseudo-progressive/pseudo-intellectual "indie" hipster douchebags that are ruining everything. My brother happens to be one of them (and an openly identifying "Anarcho-Communist" to boot).

Not everything has to be "High Art", because most of the time the media that attempts to be "Art" comes across as pretentious, asinine, and boring.

Look at William Shakespeare, now he's considered High Art, but in his own time, his plays were pop entertainment no different from modern video games or summer blockbuster movies. But they were good enough on their own merits that over time, they became High Art.

If you're actively trying to be "cultured" or "High Art", chances are your work will have little actual artistic merit and be forgotten.

I'd rather play a fun and entertaining fanservice game like "Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball 3" than boring hipster garbage like "Gone Home".

Fuck, just let Xtreme Beach Volleyball 3 be released in America for fuck's sake! So what if it "objectifies women"? It's harmless pop entertainment that even comes with a rating/warning. Stop acting like it's hardcore porn, you annoying hipster fucks.

Don't like it? Then don't play it! Stick to Gone Home and Revolution 60 and keep sucking Brianna Wu's she-cock. Leave the actual activism to us actual progressives who care about actual issues in the world.

Quote from: Crüesader;919179Hey, motorskills- look, I get it.  No one is cool with harassing someone in a game, no one is cool with threats.  But the issue tends to be a bit more complex.  This is what I see:

Some of these people call every little thing that bothers them 'harassment'.  Criticize their opinion?  Harassment.  Tell them they suck after you beat them in a duel?  Harassment.  Roleplay a character that takes a dislike to their character? Harassment. Give them an opinion that is contrary to their ideology, belief, or personal taste?  Harassment.  Flirt with a woman online, and since she lacks the intestinal fortitude to say she's not interested? Harassment. Give their product a negative review?  Harassment. Debunk their theories?  Harassment.  Make a dick/fart joke?  Harassment.  Respond to their insult with an insult?  Harassment.

Yes, some folks are thin-skinned, some folks are on a perma-crusade, and some folks just like to fight. (In fact we have folks that fit those descriptors in this forum, just from the other side!).

But even if we assume everything on your list is true, it doesn't change my basic position. The gaming community has significant toxic elements, and rather than direct energy at rooting those elements out, the energy is instead directed at closing ranks and shooting the messengers. Every mis-step, every over-reach, all the things on your list....I'm not asking [you] to ignore them, or to excuse them. I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

Quote from: Alzrius;919157I'd like to think so. Certainly, it'd be nice to have a debate that didn't devolve into acrimony and name-calling for a change!

Excellent stuff!
That said, I'll probably need to step back from this thread for a bit, since I have a commitment to One Horse Town to keep. :)

QuoteI do agree with you that it's useful, but my agreement is far more reluctant insofar as it being "very limited" goes. The data that's presented does seem to paint a fairly cohesive picture as to the overall distribution of harassment among ages, genders, and Internet venues. I do agree that the data doesn't go very deep into any further breakdown as to the circumstances of harassment in any particular online "neighborhood" as they call it, but I don't think that online gaming is "especially" limited compared to how the report treats, say, social media.

Hmm I won't debate the point, but I do think their poll group is made up primarily of folks that use social media (if anything at all).

QuoteActually, I'm not sure that I do agree with you here. The report indicated that the bulk of harassment took place over social media, and social media seems (to my mind) to be more likely to make the harasser less anonymous. Most Facebook and Twitter accounts (again, in my perception) seem inclined to openly represent a particular individual or group, though there are certainly plenty of exceptions. By contrast, online gaming handles tend to be less inclined to present the user's real identity.

Maybe we are talking at cross-purposes here? I agree that harassers on social are likely to be known (or at least identifiable) to the victim, whereas the reverse is usually the case in gaming environments.
My point was that the threshold for deciding whether to harass someone is lower when you know that your victim can't identify you.
(That said, being able to put a face to someone who posts something you don't like about [X] might actually be the trigger for some folks to post their diatribe.)

QuoteStrictly speaking, if we limit this to both "young women" and "online gaming environments," then we do disagree. That's because the study doesn't, that I recall, break down any of its findings across those three categories - age, gender, and Internet venue - all at once, that I recall:

Way more maths than I have time for at the moment. But I don't think we are too far apart in general terms, I'll happily accept your analysis for now.

QuoteI'm not dismissing their lived experiences. Rather, I'm maintaining that the data from the Pew study grants us information that is more holistic in scope, and therefore more reliable and useful, than the documentary. (This doesn't mean that the study invalidates their experiences either; quite the contrary, it's entirely possible to reconcile the two, as they might very well be part of the 11% of women who experienced harassment in online gaming.)

I think we would go round the houses on this one, and not get very far. But again, maybe we are basically on the same page. I think both sources are interesting and of use, but both have their limitations.

QuoteI don't doubt your good faith. But without evidence to support this, it remains an assertion, and because any single person's perceptions are necessarily limited, the utility that this brings to a debate is almost certainly going to be negligible. There's nothing wrong with an anecdote, but that's not evidence unto itself, simply because a single person's lived experiences are so unlikely to be representative of a larger whole (and worse, there's often no way to say for certain).

Well sure, I haven't submitted my findings as a paper for peer-review. Is it possible I'm wrong on this? Sure.
But equally, I'm surprised you aren't nodding in agreement, I don't think what I am saying is particularly controversial.

QuoteObviously we'd all like to see less harassment happening, but I think that the reasons for that (and for why it's not self-policed more) is highly nuanced, and can't wholly be relegated to people witnessing incidents of harassment, (correctly) identifying that what's happening is harassment, and simply not caring to do anything about it. As others have noted, there are numerous instances wherein something that one party might identify as "harassment" can be construed by someone else - in completely good faith - as not being harassment at all.

Again, I think this is a continuum more than a dichotomy. While there are quite clearly things that cross the line, I do believe that there's legitimate grounds to say that there's very real good-faith disagreements over what constitutes harassment per se. Disagreement, mockery, insults, and even vitriol can have nuance in their use that can make it extremely subjective as to whether or not they're harassment.

I don't disagree with any of this.

But per my response to Cruesader, I think way too much energy is put into those efforts, and not enough into addressing the core issues. Some of it is legitimate pushback (by folks who have been unfairly called out), some of it is distraction-du-jour.
And some of it, way too much of it, is by folks who refuse any efforts to deal with the toxic elements within the hobby (for a variety of reasons).

Quote from: Motorskills;919833Yes, some folks are thin-skinned, some folks are on a perma-crusade, and some folks just like to fight. (In fact we have folks that fit those descriptors in this forum, just from the other side!).

But even if we assume everything on your list is true, it doesn't change my basic position. The gaming community has significant toxic elements, and rather than direct energy at rooting those elements out, the energy is instead directed at closing ranks and shooting the messengers. Every mis-step, every over-reach, all the things on your list....I'm not asking [you] to ignore them, or to excuse them. I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

How to deal with the core issue in our hobby in one easy step:

Ignore the fucking trolls.

Quote from: Motorskills;919840Excellent stuff!
That said, I'll probably need to step back from this thread for a bit, since I have a commitment to One Horse Town to keep. :)

No worries; that's the nice thing about a message-board conversation - it takes however long it takes, and that's okay.

QuoteHmm I won't debate the point, but I do think their poll group is made up primarily of folks that use social media (if anything at all).

Looking through the section that goes over the methodology and data that was gathered for assessment, there's nothing there (that I found on a quick skim) that speaks to the overall amount of time spent online, or what online activities/communities were utilized. It mentions only that respondents self-identified as Internet users.

That said, this is another area where I'd be very cautious about casting aspersions as to the reliability of the data based on a lack of evidence one way or the other. There's nothing here that tells us what area of the Internet the respondents "primarily" used. While it would certainly be nice to have more data in that regard, a lack of evidence doesn't invalidate anything unto itself.

QuoteMaybe we are talking at cross-purposes here? I agree that harassers on social are likely to be known (or at least identifiable) to the victim, whereas the reverse is usually the case in gaming environments.
My point was that the threshold for deciding whether to harass someone is lower when you know that your victim can't identify you.
(That said, being able to put a face to someone who posts something you don't like about [X] might actually be the trigger for some folks to post their diatribe.)

I suppose that I can agree that giving someone anonymity can, in general, serve to diminish inhibitions with regards to behavior that one would be more hesitant to engage in if their identity could be determined at will. That said, I'm inclined to believe that this downside to anonymity is lesser than the benefits said anonymity brings, not the least of which is a shield (albeit a far-from-impenetrable one) that protects against harassment or more serious offenses from following someone offline (e.g. it's harder to dox someone when you don't have their real name handy).

The Pew poll reflects this; 63% of respondents agreed that online environments made people more anonymous than in offline environments. However, while 92% of respondents agreed that online environments allowed people to be more critical of others (note that "being critical" isn't the same as harassment; also, this wasn't predicated on being anonymous), 68% thought that online environments allowed people to be more supportive of others (again, not predicated on anonymity). Even if an overwhelming majority agree that being anonymous has its downsides, there's still a very large number who see benefits to it.

Throw in the fact that harassment is more likely to occur on social media than on online gaming and personal email accounts put together (summarized below) - and here I'm still purporting (albeit without any evidence, just my perception) that social media users are less inclined to use an anonymous method of self-presentation - and this seems to undercut the idea (at least, to me) that anonymity is a facilitator, or at least a major facilitator, in harassment.

• On social media, harassment was 74% likely for 18-29 year-olds, 70% likely for 30-49 year-olds, and 44% likely for 50+ year-olds.
• On online gaming, harassment was 26% likely for 18-29 year-olds, 10% likely for 30-49 year-olds, and 9% likely for 50+ year-olds.
• On personal email accounts, harassment was 10% likely for 18-29 year-olds, 14% likely for 30-49 year-olds, and 28% likely for 50+ year-olds.

QuoteWay more maths than I have time for at the moment. But I don't think we are too far apart in general terms, I'll happily accept your analysis for now.

To summarize, I was saying that the report only seemed to index two factors at any given time at most, whereas asking about people who were "young," and "female," and in "online gaming" was asking for a more specific section of data than the report provided for.

QuoteI think we would go round the houses on this one, and not get very far. But again, maybe we are basically on the same page. I think both sources are interesting and of use, but both have their limitations.

I suspect that you're probably right, here.

QuoteWell sure, I haven't submitted my findings as a paper for peer-review. Is it possible I'm wrong on this? Sure.
But equally, I'm surprised you aren't nodding in agreement, I don't think what I am saying is particularly controversial.

I may have been unclear before. I don't think that what you're saying is controversial in terms of the practice (e.g. that women will choose an online handle that is either masculine or non-gender specific so as to deliberately obscure their true gender) being believable. Rather, I'm somewhat skeptical with regards to how widespread this particular practice - or rather, that particular motivation for this practice - is. Most of the women I know who are online with regularity choose a handle for the same reasons that men do; because they like how it sounds.

Admittedly, I'm not one for online gaming, so I can't add very much where that particular realm is concerned. That said, most of the second- and third-hand stories I've heard have been entirely absent with regards to that particular motivation.

QuoteI don't disagree with any of this.

But per my response to Cruesader, I think way too much energy is put into those efforts, and not enough into addressing the core issues. Some of it is legitimate pushback (by folks who have been unfairly called out), some of it is distraction-du-jour.
And some of it, way too much of it, is by folks who refuse any efforts to deal with the toxic elements within the hobby (for a variety of reasons).

This, I suspect, is where we have the most to hash out; that's largely due to (as I see it) questions of the overall nature and prevalence of harassment (let alone who receives the brunt of it) tend to be secondary to questions of how to respond to it.

The issue here, as I see it, is that a significant amount of proposed responses tend to come with a very heavy tone of "blame the bystanders." This seems to be largely due to the recognition that the only real way to formulate any sort of widespread response (at least without radically changing the entire structure of the Internet, which most people don't seem to want) is to push for a general groundswell of self-policing. The problem with this approach is that, by working off of the presumption that everyone is guilty, it tends to engender responses that run counter to its goal.

To put it another way, trying to say that all women on the Internet are Kitty Genovese (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese) and all men are the witnesses (or however the "victims" and "bystanders" groups are arranged) is going to accomplish little besides getting pushback (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demandingness_objection) from people who don't want to be told why they're guilty of moral turpitude simply because they haven't done more. (To be clear, there are instances when action is - to my mind - morally required, and so failing to take action therefore qualifies as a moral failing. However, the bar for such actions tends to be notably higher than is typically set in indictments like "called offensive names," which is the most common form of harassment for both genders according to that poll.)

That's not surprising, since for most people any single incident of harassment is not going to be something that they've witnessed, so holding up any incident, or even string of incidents, and saying "this is why you all need to step up your game," is going to make them feel unfairly targeted, and in all likelihood cause them to resent the person saying that, and so reject the accompanying call to action.

While some might think it cynical, most people only tend to take action with regards to things that either affect them personally, or affect someone they know. Otherwise they'll be far less likely to care. This is an aspect of humanity that has long, long been known to philosophers and other observers of human nature. That's why people aren't likely to give more than a shrug when they hear that someone is upset by how they've been treated, but will go up in arms when an accusation is leveled against them (even when "them" means "leveled against a demographic that they occupy").

This isn't even getting into issues of how to respond in situations where a response is warranted. If someone is being a vicious troll towards someone else, what can you do besides hitting the "report" button and going on your way?

Quote from: Motorskills;919833Yes, some folks are thin-skinned, some folks are on a perma-crusade, and some folks just like to fight. (In fact we have folks that fit those descriptors in this forum, just from the other side!).

But even if we assume everything on your list is true, it doesn't change my basic position. The gaming community has significant toxic elements, and rather than direct energy at rooting those elements out, the energy is instead directed at closing ranks and shooting the messengers. Every mis-step, every over-reach, all the things on your list....I'm not asking [you] to ignore them, or to excuse them. I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

Dose gaming have some toxic people yes but hears the kicker SO DOSE EVERY OTHER HOBBY.
It might be your tone in your posts but your rally agents every thing i bring up in my anti censorship stance comes across more as trying to link every problem in gaming to "to sexy costumes'' "overly exaggerated women" and the whole objectification of women who ha the sjws use while ignoring the and doing nothing to deal with the under lying problems.
And hears the other problem most of the so called messengers in your post arnt saying the gaming community has toxicity issues we need to work on they try and say we are bigots by default and if we disagree with the slightest iota of what they say that we are guilty of "bad think" in some flavor or another.
And I say this as some one who will regularly calls some one out on being a douchebag while gaming.
Frankly the people who call for this dont care about helping to make the community beater they care abut power to lord over other people and controlling what other people get to play and do for THERE enjoyment.

This is a hip-hop album.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]388[/ATTACH]  

It is not much different from tens of thousands of other hip-hop albums.  In this, you will find:  Glorification of criminal activity, trivialized violence against women, blatant racial stereotyping, death threats to critics and competitors, glorification of violence and gun, objectification of women, outright sexually explicit language, disparaging body types, etc.- the entire gamut of horrible shit that these triggered outrage fetishists hate is sitting right here.  It's a exponentiall worse, and reaches a far broader audience.

Why isn't his their target?  

Easy.  Because stereotypically, gamers are a bunch of pussies.  They are coming after your stuff because they think you are a pussy.

Stop being a fucking pussy.

^The same people who vilify gamers will declare that to be a "legitimate expression" and dismiss criticism.

Quote from: Motorskills;919833. Every mis-step, every over-reach, all the things on your list....I'm not asking [you] to ignore them, or to excuse them. I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

What is "the core issue"?  Some would have us believe that it's hatred of women but I have seen little to no convincing evidence that this is the case.  There is evidence that men and women tend to experience different sorts of harassment but no real evidence that women are uniquely target for harassment because they are women.  The most common forms of online harassment are experienced by men more often than women.  This narrative of "the core issue" being hatred of women rather than toxic behavior in general is what is being questioned.  This narrative is just not supported by good evidence.  There is no good evidence that women are targeted more but there is evidence that they tend to be more upset about it than men which might be where the anecdotes you cited earlier come from.  Men get harassed just as much as women if not more but they we are less upset about it so we hear less about it.

Quote from: kosmos1214;919909It might be your tone in your posts but your rally agents every thing i bring up in my anti censorship stance comes across more as trying to link every problem in gaming to "to sexy costumes'' "overly exaggerated women" and the whole objectification of women who ha the sjws use while ignoring the and doing nothing to deal with the under lying problems

wut? :confused:

Quote from: Opaopajr;911360Actually, Poison (Roxy) started as cis-women in Japan, as women fighting in gangs was not a wholly foreign concept. (It's not a wholly foreign concept in the West either, but whatever.) The kerfuffle started when one Western SNES localization male playtester (that's right, just one) objected to any man hitting a woman. That was enough to throw a justification that Poison (Roxy) is a male transvestite (this later changed to transgenderism in both pre-op & post-op variants, as Japan really just doesn't care).

"This game is sexist, so lets make it transphobic instead."

#Facepalm

Coincidentally not condoning violence against women (https://boardgamegeek.com/article/11872193#11872193) was the same excuse the developers of 'Walk the Plank!' used for not including female pirates. Of course their first excuse was there just weren't many female pirates historically (https://boardgamegeek.com/article/11867047#11867047). Regardless you shouldn't need any excuse to follow your artistic vision.

Quote from: kosmos1214;915030Ok its been a while since i posted an up date in this thread and i dont have a lot of time iv got more to post then this about overwatch but this takes the cake and needs to be seen.

(http://i.imgur.com/GSmfnKj.png?1)

Just to reiterate, this petition is satirical, as are most of the comments. It's sad to see how much of a joke these petition sites have become.

#TheCakeIsALie

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915045I've never understood how a suggestive cartoon image of a gorgeous woman implies hatred of women.

Neither have I...

Quote from: AaronBrown99;915045Or is misogynist another co-opted word, meaning 'anything ugly women don't like?'

...and yet you present a sound basis for that assumption.

Quote from: Motorskills;915106I'm not sure this deserves a sensible answer,

That's OK, because I'm pretty sure you didn't give a sensible answer.

Quote from: Motorskills;915106But these images aren't suggestive, they are caricatures. They are perverted depictions of women, not celebration of the female form.

That's why it's hateful. And as a male gamer it's frustrating to me that it's 2016 and we still can't get beyond this bullshit.

So caricatures of the female form are hateful? Got it.

Quote from: Motorskills;915188Caricatures are not inherently hateful, of course not. Hell, one can buy caricatures of oneself if one wants.

So caricatures of the female form are not hateful? Got it.

Quote from: Motorskills;915188And it's not (simply) a matter of artistic license, it's a matter of intent. And that's what terrible.

So sexy caricatures of the female form are hateful? Got it.

Quote from: Motorskills;915195If I drive 100mph past a kid's school, so I can deliver beer to my mates on time, my behaviour is hateful, even if my audience loves the end product.

No, your behavior is irresponsible, which is a distinction all of western law makes. And it's not even that when it happens in Grand Theft Auto because it's a fucking video game.

Quote from: Motorskills;915243Rosa Parks would have been proud of you, standing up for freedom like that. The rest of us can pack up and go home! :)

Wow, you're all over the place looking for relevance, aren't you?

And Rosa Parks, standing up... I see what you did there :)

Quote from: Necrozius;915848A certain manga artist that I used to love certainly was. His "erotic" manga was mostly images of women being tortured, cut into pieces and crying. THAT'S misogynistic. Fuck that guy.

And yet somehow most of the people reading his erotic works don't end up becoming slashers or harassers. Fetish is not philosophy.

The Catcher in the Rye on the other hand...

Quote from: Alzrius;916061Thanks for these, but I have to say...linking to Polygon? Really? They're an exceptionally biased site that pushes an SJW agenda; if you have to link to them, please us an archive.is of their pages so they don't actually get the clicks.

Complaints about linking? Really? I thought we were past that bullshit.

Quote from: Spike;916074Its enduring popularity, however, was with women. Mothers and daughters would play it together.

Why?

Because they loved the social aspects of the gifting mechanics and the collecting of cute (skimpy) outfits.

Shocking to some I know, but women like cute sexy outfits for other reasons besides appealing to the 'male gaze'.

#NotAllWomen

Quote from: kosmos1214;918293Now when the change came out Blizzard had changed it to match a rather famous pin up picture and the sjws ragged and dont seem to have gotten any where since on the issue.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/aQ5-MIgAnQ4/maxresdefault.jpg)
*video of the story (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sG_-9F2QEk)

Blizzard gave'em a brilliant middle finger with that one.

Quote from: kosmos1214;918293Ok this is the last one and i big one rather recently a Hindi Regulus leader had a fit about overwatch  degrading his religion because symmetra had 2 costumes based off one of the hindi gods.

I know as many indians who were offended at depicting Kali on the Empire State Building (https://www.google.com/search?q=Kali+Empire+State+Building) as not, and at least one cosplayer of color who considers the depiction of Kali in the game Smite (https://www.google.com/search?q=Kali+Smite) to be "cultural appreciation vs appropriation". There's no winning when it comes to using religious iconography.

Quote from: Motorskills;918812Needless to say, the pro women had all experienced horrific abuse online, and get it every time they are recognisable online. Credit to them they pushed past, and are likely much better players than their abusers ever will be.

But are sexy caricatures of women the cause of this abuse?

Quote from: Motorskills;918812Our society is lot freer, and a lot more open and relaxed than at almost any time in history.

No. Even the recent 60's-80s were more permissive. They paid for it, but we're paying a different price for the opposite.

Quote from: Alzrius;919084Documentaries need to be taken with a major grain of salt, because by their very nature they're going to discard a lot of the footage they get in favor of what makes for the better story. As a general rule, a documentary should be taken in the same manner as a flyer or a pamphlet with regards to whatever issue they're examining; they're good for generating interest, but you should always follow them up with your own research rather than letting them do your thinking for you.

No. A documentary is supposed to be as unbiased as possible, and good documentarians keep this in mind throughout their work. What you're thinking of is propaganda.

Quote from: Motorskills;919108Actually the point of this thread seems to be having a love-in that conflates pushing back against over-reach with promoting inappropriate treatment [of women].

Actually I thought it was about the inability to differentiate between representation and reality.

Quote from: Alzrius;919084Insofar as online harassment goes, the Pew Research Center has found (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/) that not only are men more likely to experience it than women (44% for men vs. 37% for women), but this is also true for most (and the most prevalent) forms of harassment as well:

Uh oh, a survey from a reputable source. What could the response possibly be?

Quote from: Motorskills;919151Well okay, I think you and I can have an adult conversation about this.

First Motorskills grants their opponent 'adult' status, which implies their detractors lack such, they have such status to grant, and that such status in required to debate the premise.

Quote from: Motorskills;919151Can we agree that while the report is useful, the Pew data is nonetheless very limited in general, but especially so when it comes to online gaming harassment?

Then they try to get their opponent to agree the evidence presented is limited when it comes to the premise.

Quote from: Motorskills;919151Can we agree that harassment is more readily inflicted when the harasser has anonymity? (Not to say that it is worse, I think the Pew report indicates that some "overt" stuff can be brutally scary and damaging).

They follow that by asking speculative questions which are at best peripheral to the premise.

Quote from: Motorskills;919151Do we disagree that young women are disproportionately harassed when they are "open" in online gaming environments? Maybe so?

And finally they end with restating the premise as a question while still not establishing a cause.

Also notice how these are all questions? It's almost as if Motorskills is asking his opponent to agree with him.

Quote from: Motorskills;919151I also stand by assertion that it is not uncommon for female players to deliberately choose to play behind male or gender-blank monikers, whereas it simply doesn't happen the other way around to any great degree. My data is involvement in gaming communities for decades. Not Pew-standard, sure, but not pulled out of my ass either.

My data is just as valid, and I've found crossplay to be just as common for both genders, though they may do it for different reasons.

Quote from: Crüesader;919179Some of these people call every little thing that bothers them 'harassment'.  Criticize their opinion?  Harassment.  Tell them they suck after you beat them in a duel?  Harassment.  Roleplay a character that takes a dislike to their character? Harassment. Give them an opinion that is contrary to their ideology, belief, or personal taste?  Harassment.  Flirt with a woman online, and since she lacks the intestinal fortitude to say she's not interested? Harassment. Give their product a negative review?  Harassment. Debunk their theories?  Harassment.  Make a dick/fart joke?  Harassment.  Respond to their insult with an insult?  Harassment.

Quote from: Crüesader;919179No one deserves to get death/rape threats.  But at the same time, no gamer deserves to be lumped in with those making death/rape threats, just because he didn't pander to and kneel before someone.

Yeeep.

Quote from: Motorskills;919833But even if we assume everything on your list is true, it doesn't change my basic position.

I suspect no amount of evidence will. That's the problem.

Quote from: Motorskills;919833The gaming community has significant toxic elements,

No more so than any other hobby...

Quote from: Motorskills;919833I'm not asking [you] to ignore them, or to excuse them. I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

...and it isn't the core issue within it.

Quote from: Motorskills;919840I'm surprised you aren't nodding in agreement, I don't think what I am saying is particularly controversial.

Ah the Appeal to Popularity (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html). Just goes to show how important group approval is when it comes to these things and why people without supporting facts seek it out.

Quote from: Crüesader;919973This is a hip-hop album.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]388[/ATTACH]  

It is not much different from tens of thousands of other hip-hop albums.  In this, you will find:  Glorification of criminal activity, trivialized violence against women, blatant racial stereotyping, death threats to critics and competitors, glorification of violence and gun, objectification of women, outright sexually explicit language, disparaging body types, etc.- the entire gamut of horrible shit that these triggered outrage fetishists hate is sitting right here.  It's a exponentiall worse, and reaches a far broader audience.

Why isn't his their target?

You know, answering your own questions is kinda smarmy, but that doesn't mean it isn't a damn good question.

Do you think including the Roman Catholic "pantheon" in Smite would be offensive to people?

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;922183Complaints about linking? Really? I thought we were past that bullshit.

Given that page-views are how they make their money, and the ease of using archive.is (and greater reliability, in case of a page being edited or going down), I'd say you thought wrong.

I'm not saying that you need to do this for every link you post - certainly, I don't - but it's worth remembering that a lot of websites are monetized such that simply clicking on them means financially supporting them, and so it's notable that there's a viable alternative that lets you view their content without having to do that.

QuoteNo. A documentary is supposed to be as unbiased as possible, and good documentarians keep this in mind throughout their work. What you're thinking of is propaganda.

That's the difference between theory and practice. A documentary is presumed to be unbiased, but even if we leave aside the instances of outright fakery (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8963053/BBC-accused-of-routine-fakery-in-wildlife-documentaries.html), the simple manner of how an issue is presented can make a documentary slanted (http://niemanreports.org/articles/documentary-filmmakers-decide-how-to-present-compelling-evidence/).

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;922183...And yet somehow most of the people reading his erotic works don't end up becoming slashers or harassers. Fetish is not philosophy....

My expressed vocal distaste of a man's art and (obvious) fetish != a call for censorship or a claim that his art will be hurtful to society. I just feel that this fetish (unconsenting women being tortured and cut up into pieces) is sick as fuck and that the artist won't be getting anymore of my money. I have a right to express that feeling but you won't see me leading boycotting campaigns on Twitter.

Quote from: Necrozius;922288I have a right to express that feeling but you won't see me leading boycotting campaigns on Twitter.

Exactly!! That's the value of free speech and free expression.  

"Your art suxxors" =/= "Your art must not be sold"

Quote from: Crüesader;919179Tell someone they're a victim, and they will eat it up like candy.

Agreed.

How did "Victim" become a badge of pride???

Quote from: Motorskills;919833The gaming community has significant toxic elements,

SJWs are the toxic element and we're doing what we can to scrub the fuckers off like barnacles.

Quote from: Motorskills;919833I am asking you to putting at least as much energy into dealing with the core issue within our hobby.

The core issue within our hobby is we need more players.

For current players, they can help solve the issue by inviting non-gamers to play with them.

The SJW "online horror stories" are laughably stupid. No more credible than the "D&D is devil worship" stories the stupidest of people believed in the 80s. Somehow, because fucktards post their idiocy on blogs we're supposed to believe them now. Why? Did anonymous people with shitty agendas suddenly become more honest in past 30 years?

No. Pat Pulling and her kind would LOVE the SJW garbage plaguing us today. Kindred spirits who "just want to protect the children" with unrelenting censorship.

Fuck.that.shit.

SJW bullshit and victim nonsense will never grow the hobby.

If you meet fun people into geeky stuff, invite them over to game. Treat them like a guest. Hopefully they will treat you well in return. Maybe they may like the RPG experience and come back. Maybe they won't. Rinse and Repeat.

Quote from: Motorskills;920132wut? :confused:

That's why I "ignore listed" him ages ago.  He apparently thinks lack of spelling, punctuation, and grammar make him all edgy an' shit instead of merely unintelligible.

Quote from: Necrozius;922288My expressed vocal distaste of a man's art and (obvious) fetish != a call for censorship or a claim that his art will be hurtful to society. I just feel that this fetish (unconsenting women being tortured and cut up into pieces) is sick as fuck and that the artist won't be getting anymore of my money. I have a right to express that feeling but you won't see me leading boycotting campaigns on Twitter.

That guy's stuff is right over the edge...and beautifully drawn.  It's a goddamn mindscramble.  Is he a great artist who is two steps away from a serial killer, or is he a great artist who is ripping away the masks and veneers of society to show us something ugly about ourselves?  I generally don't buy the "transgression as a challenge to face the Truth" because I think it is a very overused idea used to justify all forms of shit, but with that guy, I can almost buy it.

Quote from: 3rik;922247Do you think including the Roman Catholic "pantheon" in Smite would be offensive to people?

It wouldn't bother me at all though most other Christians would lose there shit.

Quote from: Motorskills;920132wut? :confused:

sorry iv been super busy ill try to get a post up t try and clarify what i said.

Quote from: Alzrius;922257Given that page-views are how they make their money, and the ease of using archive.is (and greater reliability, in case of a page being edited or going down), I'd say you thought wrong.

I'm not saying that you need to do this for every link you post - certainly, I don't - but it's worth remembering that a lot of websites are monetized such that simply clicking on them means financially supporting them, and so it's notable that there's a viable alternative that lets you view their content without having to do that.



That's the difference between theory and practice. A documentary is presumed to be unbiased, but even if we leave aside the instances of outright fakery (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8963053/BBC-accused-of-routine-fakery-in-wildlife-documentaries.html), the simple manner of how an issue is presented can make a documentary slanted (http://niemanreports.org/articles/documentary-filmmakers-decide-how-to-present-compelling-evidence/).

Yes take for example  frontline  on pbs its a documentary  series but the last episode is easy to sum up as go vote for pour Hilary.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922392That's why I "ignore listed" him ages ago.  He apparently thinks lack of spelling, punctuation, and grammar make him all edgy an' shit instead of merely unintelligible.

And like I'v told you i do try though I'm also responding to a post by a man who cant stand the idea that Gygaxian play might not be the best think ever.

Quote from: Motorskills;920132wut? :confused:

Ok so as i tried to say yes gaming has its share of toxic people but so does ever other hobby.
Now it may be the way you come across to me when you respond to my posts  but you sound like you are trying to link all the issues in gaming to the whole "sexy women issue".
Now my problem with that is it does nothing to actuly deal with the under laying issues that lead to the name calling,shitty behavior and general harassment seen in some games and groups.
The people you called messengers have never as far as i have ever seen say that gaming has harassment issues that we need to fix and this is what we as a community need to do to fix it
Instead these messengers as you call them blame the gaming community as a whole for the its problems and usually then claim in blanket statements that gamers are bigots and or sexists.
And then even if they are being somewhat level headed and you disagree with  the smallest part of what they say the claim something else horrible about you.
To be  honest from what i have seen of these "messengers" they don't care abut making the gaming community a beater place they care about there own power  and trying to control what games other people play.

Quote from: kosmos1214;922868And like I'v told you i do try

Sorry but it's pretty obvious that you just can't be bothered.  Typing I've or I'll correctly is not that complicated. It wouldn't take much trying to do it right.  It's obvious that you just can't be bothered to spend the few extra seconds it would take.

Quote from: yosemitemike;922900Sorry but it's pretty obvious that you just can't be bothered.  Typing I've or I'll correctly is not that complicated. It wouldn't take much trying to do it right.  It's obvious that you just can't be bothered to spend the few extra seconds it would take.

I think he's using a phone.  Not a computer.

Just a thought.

Quote from: Crüesader;922903I think he's using a phone.  Not a computer.

Just a thought.

Sadly no iv never figured out why but i spell terribly on a computer not that I'm great on paper.
Its one of those odd things that seems to happen with no real explanation.

Quote from: 3rik;922247Do you think including the Roman Catholic "pantheon" in Smite would be offensive to people?

Inevitably.

It's also conspicuously missing in Scion.

Quote from: Alzrius;922257Given that page-views are how they make their money, and the ease of using archive.is (and greater reliability, in case of a page being edited or going down), I'd say you thought wrong.

No. Page views actually cost them money. Their profit comes from ads, so if you don't want to give them money, use ad blockers.

This is also dirty SJW thinking as it endorses a view that listening to someone financially benefits them, which means listening to opposing viewpoints is equivalent to endorsing and empowering to the enemy. So tell me, how we can have a free exchange of ideas if that's the premise everyone is working under?

#PartOfTheProblem

Quote from: Alzrius;922257and so it's notable that there's a viable alternative that lets you view their content without having to do that.

Which reminds me, rpg.net now blocks archive.is.

I wonder why.

Quote from: Alzrius;922257That's the difference between theory and practice. A documentary is presumed to be unbiased, but even if we leave aside the instances of outright fakery (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8963053/BBC-accused-of-routine-fakery-in-wildlife-documentaries.html), the simple manner of how an issue is presented can make a documentary slanted (http://niemanreports.org/articles/documentary-filmmakers-decide-how-to-present-compelling-evidence/).

The links you've provided are demonstrations of fraud and propaganda, not documentaries.

Quote from: Necrozius;922288My expressed vocal distaste of a man's art and (obvious) fetish != a call for censorship or a claim that his art will be hurtful to society. I just feel that this fetish (unconsenting women being tortured and cut up into pieces) is sick as fuck and that the artist won't be getting anymore of my money. I have a right to express that feeling but you won't see me leading boycotting campaigns on Twitter.

Fair enough, but do you believe the people who enjoy his work are also sick as fuck?

Quote from: CRKrueger;922421That guy's stuff is right over the edge...and beautifully drawn.  It's a goddamn mindscramble.  Is he a great artist who is two steps away from a serial killer, or is he a great artist who is ripping away the masks and veneers of society to show us something ugly about ourselves?  I generally don't buy the "transgression as a challenge to face the Truth" because I think it is a very overused idea used to justify all forms of shit, but with that guy, I can almost buy it.

While people don't like to admit it, there's definitely an inclination to believe that aesthetics = ethics. It's harassment unless the guy's good looking. It's blackface unless it's well done. It's offensive unless the joke's actually funny. You can make a drinking game regarding how many times people on the internet use superficial appearance traits to support statements about a person's values and intentions.

If you do it well you'll be forgiven, and once you're successful enough people will justify your actions for you.

#UnlessYoureBillCosby

Quote from: Spinachcat;922391How did "Victim" become a badge of pride???

We prefer the title 'survivor' thankyouverymuch.

Quote from: Spinachcat;922391The core issue within our hobby is we need more players.

This is exactly what the SJWs justify their actions with. But let's be honest, on all sides, it's really about adding more players like ourselves.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922392That's why I "ignore listed" him ages ago.  He apparently thinks lack of spelling, punctuation, and grammar make him all edgy an' shit instead of merely unintelligible.

And yet that didn't help you ignore them or prevent you from making this juvenile commentary. I guess such features can't change behavior after all.

Quote from: kosmos1214;922868Yes take for example  frontline  on pbs its a documentary  series but the last episode is easy to sum up as go vote for pour Hilary.

You mean this one (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-choice-2016/)?

God forbid we provide sources and risk people coming to their own conclusions :)

#DangerousThinking

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923184No. Page views actually cost them money. Their profit comes from ads, so if you don't want to give them money, use ad blockers.

Which not everyone uses, and which are in a constant war of updated ad software versus updated adblocker software. It's far easier to just look at a snapshot of the page.

QuoteThis is also dirty SJW thinking as it endorses a view that listening to someone financially benefits them, which means listening to opposing viewpoints is equivalent to endorsing and empowering to the enemy. So tell me, how we can have a free exchange of ideas if that's the premise everyone is working under?

#PartOfTheProblem

Uh, no. Going to their page financially benefits them, at least potentially, which is part of the problem. You can listen to them without benefiting them by doing what I previously suggested and using an archive.is of their page. Hence how you can have a free exchange of ideas while still working under that premise.

#NotActuallyListeningAreYou

QuoteWhich reminds me, rpg.net now blocks archive.is.

I wonder why.

No, it doesn't (http://archive.is/cplki).

QuoteThe links you've provided are demonstrations of fraud and propaganda, not documentaries.

The former link is, the latter link is not. Whether you like it or not, executive decisions are made with regards to what to show and what not to show as part of a documentary. No matter what the subject is (http://archive.is/GlNz3), there's going to be stuff left on the cutting room floor in order to make a piece that's interesting to watch, and someone's going to think that the excised material is relevant, and so the "documentary" is just propaganda.

That's why I said that you should treat a documentary as a tool to generate interest in a subject - because that's what they are - and do your own research from there. Otherwise you're being asked to "listen and believe" what they tell you.

Talk about "dirty SJW thinking."

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923184Fair enough, but do you believe the people who enjoy his work are also sick as fuck?

To be honest, yes. I think that someone has "issues" if they enjoy art depicting un-consenting women being sexually tortured, disfigured or cut up into pieces (the women in these illustrations sure look like they're upset and in peril).

...but people should be allowed to produce and acquire whatever porn they want (obviously as long as it is legal and isn't at the expense of someone else's well-being, safety or health).

I mean, who cares what Necrozius, some stranger on the web, thinks about it? I haven't made it a campaign or quest or something to denounce it.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923184Inevitably.

It's also conspicuously missing in Scion.

Well, I think Smite adding character options from the Christian/Catholic "pantheon" - just throwing in some superpowered saints and/or prophets for lack of multiple deities - would be great fun. And after that they can start work at the Jewish and Islamic sections. I'd also be curious to see how the SJW would react.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923184While people don't like to admit it, there's definitely an inclination to believe that aesthetics = ethics. It's harassment unless the guy's good looking. It's blackface unless it's well done. It's offensive unless the joke's actually funny. You can make a drinking game regarding how many times people on the internet use superficial appearance traits to support statements about a person's values and intentions.

Not all of those things are similar I'd argue, but still, point taken.  If an art piece is well-done, but of a horrific nature, the skill of it can make one think there must be some "artistic" rationale for it.  Also, if you look at very disturbing artwork and aren't turned on by it, the fact that it's well done can make it difficult to believe the artist did it just to get off.  There's a definite benefit of the doubt there.  If Michael Bay could possess Martin Scorcese when he made the next Transformers movie, some critics would be giving it 4 stars calling it a Deconstruction of the Action Film Genre.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923184snip

You mean this one (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-choice-2016/)?

God forbid we provide sources and risk people coming to their own conclusions :)

#DangerousThinking

That might be the one it might not.
I didn't get to watch the whole show but what i saw very much sounded like look at how hard a life pour Hillery had go vote for her.
Whats more i have yet to see actual objective coverage of any political subject out of PBS.

Quote from: 3rik;923267Well, I think Smite adding character options from the Christian/Catholic "pantheon" - just throwing in some superpowered saints and/or prophets for lack of multiple deities - would be great fun. And after that they can start work at the Jewish and Islamic sections. I'd also be curious to see how the SJW would react.

Hell yeah I'd find it fun to play as say Jeanne d'Arc.