Blarghagh

I don't know if that's really "working correctly" because "feeling bad about it" can take so many forms. I highly doubt a person whose psychological response to seeing a fit person is "you'll never look like that, go die in a hole you fat pig" is going to be motivating, let alone the "correct response".

Haha, now that's a comeback, KaineParker. Gave me a good laugh. Okay, so I was obviously exaggerating but some days I'm 2-3 kg lighter or heavier than I was the day before without having done anything different. I'd hate to mess with peoples hard work, but 5 kg is kinda peanuts as far as I'm concerned. I'm a skinny guy, though, so hey, maybe that just goes to prove the idea that fat just gets stamped on your DNA and it gets harder to lose it? Now my ladyfriend lost over 20 kg pretty quickly by changing her diet. She was diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome and dropped milk, gluten, onions, alchohol and a couple of other things that triggered it and about one and a half year later she's stable at almost 25 kg less. On the other hand, it's made cooking so boring!

5kg? That's how you debunk this? Pal, I lose 5kg taking a dump.

So diet and excercise are the way to prevent it, but once you are obese it becomes part of you? All the more reasons to put more effort into education and diet/excercise programs for young people.

Which should go to show that we don't really care whether someone finds something offensive.

Interesting how people are so sure the GG thread got closed because people complained. It's not our policy to discuss decisions in public, but I can tell you guys that ain't why. That kind of witch-hunt mentality also bothers me - if you guys want someone to blame, blame me. As the only moderator who participated in that thread and the only moderator who is mostly pro-GG my input was the deciding factor and I supported the time out. Also, note that word use. A time-out isn't an allround topic ban. Leave it lie for now, but that doesn't mean it'll stay off-limits forever. Also, I laughed out loud at Enoch's suggestion that we were cleaning up for the PoE crowd. I believe the influx of new members when the beta backer began was dubbed as "uninspiring" by the same people who complain about this reactionary echo-chamber. I also wonder how it became an echo chamber. Could it have been sentiments such as "this 4chan topic is maybe a little bit tangentially related to GamerGate! Keep that where it belongs so I don't have to look at it!"? I suppose people on both sides of the spectrum could ask themselves if that entrenchment and side-picking was a factor in the decision instead of blaming "the other side", but I highly doubt people will. So, so true. If they're boxers. If they're tighty-greenies ... still cool. TMNT! Boxers. Hope so, not that it'll matter much with the new ideas on making this a 'safe space' or whatever the invented terminology is. Hey, this means oby might get banned - I guess Walshingam may climax if that comes to pass What new ideas? People are acting like this forum has suddenly taken a turn. A couple of years ago, I posted TISM's music video to "everyone else has had more sex than me", a music video where a cute cartoon bunny sings funny lyrics while dancing. It was deemed inappropriate and removed. You guys think you have less freedom these days? You guys crack me up. Nostalgia filter in action. Also, when do we ban anyone? Seriously. I don't think anyone other than spammers has been banned in... I don't know, since way before I joined the team. Are we really so stifling to your freedoms? Geeze, isn't it enough that they're contained? Evidence has been mounting, but its now official. You are my favorite person on this forum. I love you too, man. Want to go see Fifty Shades of Grey together? *has no idea how to respond to compliments*

The superiority of my undergarments to anyone else's. (They're green and say ninja turtles.)

I have been asking this for the last two pages. Please define it yourself and we take it from there. And I did! "Expecting people to not behave like racist/sexist/etc. ****wads" is pretty much my definition. I want something more formal, do better! So the definition may differ because its based on the word "political " which will differ from region to region and within cultures. So political correctness will be different in Saudi Arabia than Sweden...I think we all understand that But this is a Western forum where there are clear rules that are defined that you will not discriminate against people based on sexual orientation or race or sex or many other things So "political correctness " in this context is that you won't use offensive or derogatory comments when addressing these groups or encourage dislike of these groups through some discussion Thats just one example of what political correctness means Ok, i will play nice here. How can a vibrant and open society grow if it depends on the sensibilities of the one feeling most offended? Excellent question, but you are misunderstanding something. We don't concern ourselves with the feelings of minority groups, for example, because this helps us grow as a society. We do it to prevent us going backwards. In the Western world we should be striving for a society that is completely tolerant of all groups so if you allow offensive comments to run rampant on a forum you are taking that forum backwards...this applies to the general level of how a society is measured nowadays. So in summary societies don't grow based on how they treat victims of abuse but they can get taken backwards. Russia is a good example of this Should we?

Wait, so if someone is being racist for the sole purpose of angering people, it's not racist? Even though, logically, the people most likely to be angered by said display of racism are members of the race in question? That's some shaky logic there, methinks. That sentance precludes that you can somehow know the exact intent of another person. Which is not really possible unless you are a mind-reader. I don't understand why you guys are fixated on intent in the first place. Context is important, intent is not. Racist things said by a comedian in a satirical commentary? Context informs how it should be perceived. Troll saying racist things? No context to inform how it should be perceived, just person saying racist things therefore being racist regardless of whether they identify as such. I'm surprised to see this kind of post-modern nonsense coming from you guys

Hold on, if harmful can't be defined in any way other than subjective (because it depends on the goals of the person) doesn't that mean objectively harmful is impossible?

Oh my god, look at the comments on that. They're saying things like "I want these guys to take on politicians!" Why? They're dogpiling an easy target ten years too late and doing it not by being effective and truthful but by being jerks about it. Here's the tl;dr version of that interview when it comes down to what is actually talked about: "Are you a liar?" "Nuh-uh!" "Yah-uh!" "Nuh-uh!"

I had a friend who believed he didn't like Ben Stiller movies, then I asked about each of his movie individually. Turns out he does like his movies, I'm only remembering this because it was The Secret Life of Walter Mitty that prompted that conversation. I have generally liked movies that he directed, but disliked movies that he was simply starring in.

I wouldn't say he's "the worst", but a lot of his work does show some deepseated issues. I'm not sure how he became a feminist icon or why people credit him with writing "strong women". If there's a scene in Firefly with Mal and a female character in which he is not asserting his dominance over them, I have yet to find it. The ultimate alpha.

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty - wow, I enjoyed a Ben Stiller movie. Like, a lot. It was a wonderfully positive and life-affirming little film with a couple of funny sequences and a nice message that was clichéd yet somehow felt fresh in this cynical world. It made me feel warm and fuzzy.

Oh, eww!

I know, right? If I had a quarter for every time in those threads I pointed out the humor of a bunch gamers generalizing all feminists over a bunch of feminists generalizing all gamers I'd have... well, probably a buck fifty or so... this is my most anticlimatic post ever.

I do agree with this. The sad thing is that the current culture surrounding it and the terminology it uses is probably keeping some women away thinking these guys are all hardcore MRAs rather than disillusioned with feminism as a movement due to radicals and media treatment. Almost every single one of these guys has posted "I support real equality, I'm an egalitarian" or somesuch so really, by the definition we wish people still saw feminism as, most of them would be feminists. But definitions and perceptions change and differ from person to person. Whaddya gonna do, it's a hot button issue right now. Eventually it'll blow over, but right now you only have to mention the word feminist and people start foaming at the mouth. I just don't think going around saying things like "you're on the wrong side of history" is helping much either, tbh. It's more complicated than just being a winning side and a losing side. As for the threads about it, well, I had hoped to keep it somewhat contained to the sexism/journalism thread these days but... here's this thread.

Who is rolling over on it on the concept? Doesn't seem like people (here) are against the concept, that concept being equality, some idiotic exceptions aside. At most it's a terminology thing. Not to be associated with that vocal group (of high level prominents that can be argued to have enough pull to represent feminism), they'll be equalists or egalitarians or humanists or whatever. Sounds like a language change to me. I don't mourn the loss of someone identifying as a feminist if they identify as something else that means the same bloody thing without the annoying bagagge. What matters is what people do, not what word they rationalize fits it best. EDIT: FYI, Hurl adjusted the post that I was responding to so... this may make no more sense.

It's not really small fry like Sarkeesian, Hurl. It's not tumblr blogs. Those are just highly visible currently, but it's been a serious undercurrent from the high level organisational leaders, media makers and college professors for a while now. "All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." - Catharine MacKinnon, legal scholar and professor from Yale and Michigan. "If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." - Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College. "We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." - Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor in Chief "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women’s movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." - Sheila Cronin, National Organization for Women "I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He’s just incapable of it." - Barbara Jordan, Former Congresswoman. "All men are rapists and that’s all they are" - Marilyn French, Author and Advisor to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign Even Gloria Steinem herself is a horrible transphobe, claiming "Transsexuals are paying an extreme tribute to the power of sex roles. In order to set their real human personalities free, they surgically mutilate their own bodies..." I still identify as a feminist - I know these women don't own the word and these views do not represent the majority, but these are not some 14 year old nobodies with nasty blogs and their words and action create a certain public perception and it's ridiculous to act surprised that feminism has become unsympathetic to the public as a result - let alone after such nonsense as "Shirtgate" and the horrible "guilty until proven innocent" of the UVA Rape Hoax scandal. For every Christina H. Sommers (who, as Oerwinde pointed out, has distanced herself from the "whole" of feminism by identifying as a specific subgroup, "equity feminism") there's seems to be two Dworkins publishing books about how men need to be culled from society. It's not a "small group" of radicals - it's not the majority, but it's a significant group and more importantly, they are incredibly loud. Think of it this way, what you think about when you see a Swastika? Is it the sacred hindu symbol that is still in use today? I doubt it. It's easier to remember horrible crap.

Hold on, what? Who is drawing a line in the sand except you? At most, people are complaining about the sad state of something that was meant to be better. That's the entire thing that turns people off from it. Racism comes from racists, who aren't supposed to stand for equality because they're dumb. Homophobia comes rednecks, who don't stand for equality. Misandry comes from people self-proclaimed but also widely believed to be for equality. They're supposed to be better than this. Essentially, when a racist is a racist, it's according to plan. When a feminist is misandrist, it's not.

I get where both sides are coming from. The vast majority of feminists are good people who just want equal rights for everyone. However, there's a huge contigent of "radical feminists" (a misnomer if there ever was one, as they're not radical about women's rights at all, they're radical misandrists), especially online, that don't want that at all and have ruined the, if not credibility of, then at least the public goodwill towards feminism. I'm not sure it's in other feminsts' ability or even responsibility to do something about that. Either way, I think Hurl's post is condescending and most of it is dead wrong regardless of that. Everyone who I've ever heard claim anything about the "wrong side of history" has turned out to be full of it. Saying that in the same sentence as "it's a complex issue" is just ridiculous. Plus, it's a gross oversimplification that it's about getting more rights for your daughters. Some feminists want to give your daughters more rights at expense your sons, others want to take rights away from your daughters for "their own good" - a woman should not dress provocatively because then they will be objectified by men. Cover up so men aren't tempted, gee, I wonder what religions practice that. I don't want feminism to go down, I consider myself a feminist - women are treated unfairly in a lot of aspects and especially in certain places of the world and that is awful - but there's a reason that feminism has become a dirty word - because it's been dirtied. It's hilarious that you say it's the "wrong side of history" because the amount of women that even still identify as feminists is the lowest it has been in decades. If feminism doesn't get some good PR and soon, it won't even be a factor in history. Emma Watson's speech on feminism started with the disclaimer "feminism has become synonymous with manhating, and this has to stop". Why do you think that is? The following week, all the goodwill built up by her speech was removed because some feminists thought it was important to harass a scientist over a shirt with some tasteful pinups of strong, confident women. I mentioned this briefly in the GamerGate thread, but there was this story making the rounds on the internet that a feminist aborted a baby after finding out it was going to be a boy and she could not bring another monster into the world. It was obviously false but I showed this to people and every single person I showed, even, no, especially the women, believed it in a second and did not consider it out of character for feminists in any way. Whatever you or me might say the definition of feminism really is, that is what the public perception of it is - the people that are so out there that nobody considers the possibility that them killing a baby is a hoax. I want feminism, true feminism about equal rights, to succeed but the way it is right now, it's not going to.

I'm with Numetree. I recognize the art of the game, I just don't think it's fun to play. At all. Especially the boss fights, that would win the award for "worst boss fights in a Nintendo title" if there was such an award.

Kingsman: The Secret Service. Boody hilarious, bloody epic and bloody... bloody. Vaughn brings the same type of charm that he did with the original Kickass movie and sidesteps the pitfalls. Awesome.

Well its starting to backfire now. The SVU episode has caused a backlash against the gaming press amongst major developers now, with high ups in Blizzard and Ubisoft coming out in favor now. It just seems like just a matter of time before the support leads to a spillover into the mainstream media. Source?

We're gonna go to some bistro we wanted to try and then see Kingsman: The Secret Service (the only movie that is actually playing the local theatre other than 50 Shades of Rape). I also gave her The Wolf Among Us because she really enjoyed the Walking Dead games.