MLMII
-
Posts
57 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by MLMII
-
-
Is it really? It's not like saying something is unnatural is the same as saying it's bad. Cars are unnatural, but I don't have a problem with cars.
Have you been living under a rock? It's the language used by bigots when they advocate for making homosexuals second-class citizens.
And people are not fricking cars. Using "unnatural" about a person is extremely loaded with negative connotations.
Actually no, calling something unnatural or even using a pronoun that you don't agree with is insulting, insensitive, and quite frankly ... just plain rude ... but doesn't rise to the level of bigotry on its face. SJWs tend to forget that the righteous virtue of tolerance that everyone should strive for isn't necessarily the same as acceptance.
So yeah, to use your metaphor, if GG has gotten the left sole comfortably broken in then the SJWs and you have done an equally fine job with the right.
Re underlined: Interesting qualifier. So you agree that prior experience could lead one to reasonably assume that people who refer to some particular group of people as unnatural are most likely bigots? You actually comprehend that context is a thing?
Well, that's a pleasant surprise.
As for insisting that the two sides must somehow be equal... Whatever. It's so ridiculous that I can't even feel insulted.
Actually no, even with my "interesting qualifier" I do not find hypersensitivity in general to ever be reasonable. ... As for the rest, well, that's to be expected I suppose.
-
Although I can understand the frustration if one were trying to make a guide thread or the like I personally like the fact that after a certain point (How long is the actual cutoff by the way?) a poster that you are "discussing" something with is locked in stone.
-
Actually no, calling something unnatural or even using a pronoun that you don't agree with is insulting, insensitive, and quite frankly ... just plain rude ... but doesn't rise to the level of bigotry on its face. SJWs tend to forget that the righteous virtue of tolerance that everyone should strive for isn't necessarily the same as acceptance.
So yeah, to use your metaphor, if GG has gotten the left sole comfortably broken in then the SJWs and you have done an equally fine job with the right.
-
... but the bigots are demonstrably more interested in hurling insults. ...
Pot, meet Kettle.
-
1
-
-
I was appalled by the revised one actually. First one didn't bother me so much but "death to all she-males!", really? A bit over the top imho, but it's their game.
Umm .... really? You do realize that I just posted both poems so outright lying about the content doesn't really work ... right?
Joke fails if smiley is not included.. for some...
Either that or you need to work on your delivery.
-
I was appalled by the revised one actually. First one didn't bother me so much but "death to all she-males!", really? A bit over the top imho, but it's their game.
Umm .... really? You do realize that I just posted both poems so outright lying about the content doesn't really work ... right?
I like to think OP is really that adorably naive and had this big happy "what could go wrong?
" smile across his face when making this thread.As much as that mental image pleases me I can't quite bring myself to believe it.
-
For the benefit for those few that honestly may not have heard of the situation yet it goes like this...
A kickstarter included a poem as one of the backer gravesites. A person on twitter found it to be offensive and tweeted Sawyer about it in addition to blowing twitter up. The devs talked to said kickstarter and the discussion ended with the kickstarter writing a new poem. The devs then replaced said poem but for whatever reason did not include it in the patch notes.
The original Poem read;
Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed.
He once was alive, but now he's dead.
The last woman he bedded, turned out a man
And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran.
And the new one reads;
Here lies Firedorn, a bard, a poet
He was also a card, but most didn't know it
A poem he wrote in jest was misread
They asked for blood, so now he's just dead
There, hopefully I managed to avoid my own bias in relaying the situation.
-
2
-
-
Actually it will be interesting to see whether there is a noticeable difference in future kickstarter funding ... I personally suspect that there won't be a major difference but I am curious. ... But then again I'm also curious what the reaction would have been had the poem's removal been included in the patch notes.
-
1
-
-
No, once again you fail to actually read and comprehend what I am saying. I never said " only the LGBT community opinions matters on this issue "
As you well know I have many opinions on SJ issues like gender equality and gay rights and I am neither a women or a member of the LGBT community. I am white, heterosexual male
So I would a complete hypocrite if I said only members of a minority group can comment on issues relating to that minority group. I said " And no that doesn't mean that other people can't comment but surly the actual minority group targeted has more credibility "
So to explore this point a little further, if there are 10 African Americans in room and two white people and a joke is perceived to be racist towards the African Americans and the room is asked " is this joke racist " and the 10 African Americans say " no " I would find it strange if the two white guys still said the joke was racist. Thats why I said " the targeted minority group should have more credibility " ...thats not the same thing as saying " no one else can comment"
So when someone says " my friends didn't find the limerick offensive " ...my next question would be "well are your friends members of the LGBT community " to understand context
And please when did i say " men are oppressors " ...you are clearly confused, I said no such thing but I agree with the person who said that on most other things
What's the difference? "Should have more credibility" and "shouldn't get to weigh in?" I mean the last guy who posted, your response was "were any of those people transgender?" You obviously are providing them with bias and giving their stance more weight. Everything I said more or less still applies.
The "men are oppressors" line is on point with what I said a couple posts back about how giving any perceived differences in STEM the title of "sexism" only serves to escalate any emotionally-charged responses that may occur. That snippet was posted by someone else....who conveniently disappeared (as my debate partners so often seem to do these past few pages) when I posed the question of why he insists on labeling men as oppressors and what purpose it serves. My point was and still is that I see no definitive reason to label it as sexism, nor do I see why the term or phrases like "men are the oppressors" should be used since they contribute absolutely nothing and only serve to devolve discussions into petty quarrels. The second part of your post is indentical in tone. What ****ing purpose is there in asking me if I think only white heterosexuals should be allowed to voice their opinions? You knew damned well how that statement came off and you know damned well what the answer to that question is, and yet you ask it as though it's relevant, topical, or does anything for the discussion. Once again Bruce, this is why you have this reputation of being passive aggressive.
And in general I find your "it's to give it context" point flawed. I find the people who "use context" are the same people who skim newspapers and develop their political stances based on what the democrats or the republicans think, without actually bothering to consider the issue themselves and critically think if they approve or not. The only relevance I believe such a question to hold is if the overwhelming majority (I'm talking 95%+) of a community is in agreement on something. Even this, I would expect to be applied more to communities and cultures, not sex orientations or the like. I would be interested what the black community thinks of the local police force vs. what the white community thinks, I would not be so interested in how community X perceives a joke vs. community Y.
I do not expect that myself and other disabled people will come to a full-stop concensus on disabled issues, I do not expect the gay community to come to a full-stop concensus on gay issues, I certainly don't expect transgender people to have a concensus on....a ****ing joke. A joke is a matter of a personality, how sensitive the person is, their brand of humor and how much they appreciate humor in general, not sex orientation.
I really cannot make this point any more clearer, I am not saying that people outside minority groups cannot comment on issues pertaining to minority groups. I make comments all the time about perceived and real issues that minority groups grapple with. So I would be a hypocrite if I was saying this now
I am saying the opinions of minority groups should carry more credibility when discussions come up around points like " is this offensive " . And saying something has more credibility definitely doesn't mean " no one else can weigh in ". I don't equivocate, if I wanted to say " no one else should weigh in about LGBT issues except for the LGBT community " I would have said that.
But I retract my comment " Do you think the best people to decide if certain jokes\comments are offensive are white, heterosexual males ?" , this was inappropriate because to be fair I don't think you believe that. So I apologize for that
And context is very important when people make certain points. Since this discussion is going backwards and forwards with people saying " I find it offensive " or " I didn't find it offensive " so when he said " my friends didn't find it offensive " it seemed perfectly natural to me to ask " are your friends from the transgender community "
Perhaps I could have worded that question better but it was just an initial exploratory point to understand where his comment was coming from . I had no idea if his friends are members of the LGBT community but I wanted to know so there was no assumed bias from me
Um ... actually what you did was ask a question that considering simple demographics an honest answer would most likely fit into your narrative and provide you with the emotional ammo to "lessen" the perspective of him and his friends.
-
3
-
-
See how the thread goes dead silent the moment anyone's actually addressing the subject matter seriously?
Exactly what I've been talking about...
I kind of wish I was in the earlier threads, but as I noted in my first post here, there's not much else to say now that we have a definitive timeline and that Firedorn himself has spoken on the matter. Obsidian's made their decision, Firedorn is happy to leave things as they are. So a substantive discussion is difficult to start because the issue is essentially over. We just have to live with the results is all.
See, I don't really believe that it wasn't more than a suggestion for him to change it when I see something like this:
I've seen GamerGate reference this a dozen times over and I've called out the fallacy here a dozen times over, only to be downvoted on that subreddit because heaven forbid I speak out against the dominant narrative (yes yes, believe it or not, GamerGate can be subject to hugboxes too, and not everyone who criticizes your methods is your "enemy" or a "shill").
It's simple: he doesn't like the guy that complained. That's what the underlined is referring to. Nothing about that statement says "Obsidian forced me to change it at gunpoint." People are reading too much into that one snippet, taking it out of context and trying to suit their narrative. He's saying that he himself finds the complaint ridiculous, but given a choice between standing up against that person he disagrees with and consequently and inadvertedly making Obsidian "back" him, or removing the limerick entirely to save Obsidian some skin for his limerick and his opinion, he chose the rational choice of wanting to let Obsidian be absolved of involvement.
Just because he chose to remove it doesn't mean he has to agree with the opinion of the person who raised the complaints to begin with, or even sympathize with them. I mean this is the guy who's replacement limerick was giving the finger to the people who led him to remove it, something Obsidian gave the green light to include. Check his post history, it's crystal clear this was his intent. You can even PM Firedorn yourself and ask him. It's not as if he's hiding; I myself PMed him on this matter because I got sick of seeing 20 different people interpret his posts 20 different ways to suit their own conspiracies and devices.
I would actually ask YOU to explain how on earth that post proves it wasn't his decision, especially when other posts by Firedorn directly suggest the opposite.
You are failing to apply Occam's Razor and failing to accept Firedorn's account as truth, instead clinging to some theory that he's lying to us and slipped up in that one underlined snippet (again taken out of context) which you have absolutely no proof for.
People are just mad and want justification to direct their anger at Obsidian, and they're frustrated they lack such justification so they're making it up at this point, happy to cling to any half-hearted attempts to justify it.
As stated, PM the guy yourself if you're so curious. Give him a week or so (that's about how long a response took for me) and don't be surprised when his response doesn't fit your narrative.
Good point on the fact that no-one wants to hear things that are counter to their narrative, but for me at least what stands out in his post is that he "didn't even let it come to that point of the discussion". Perhaps you are right and I'm reading way too much into things but to me at least that post sounds like Firedorn felt that the discussion's tone would have ended with the poem being removed either way.
I can't speak for them, but I have. My mothers a crack head. That's not hyperbole, I mean that as a statement of literal truth. My mother smokes crack; she is an actual crack head. Drug addiction is rampant through her side of the family; cocaine, heroin, alcohol. It hit my brother and sister, too; I'm the only one who ended up without a major monkey on their back, and it was mostly by luck.
The reason I have a hard time getting prescription pain killers is because I was heavily into meth amphetamine for about a year when I was 19. I moved half-way across the country to live with my dad and entered treatment, and I haven't done it since. But all of that is in my medical records, and as far as any doctor is concerned I'm just a druggy looking for a fix.
Well to be fair then... it's a pretty legitimate concern. It's a bitch for you, yeah, but.. you can't blame the doctor for being concerned. Not only from a long line of addictive personalities, but also an addict yourself, you're probably about one dosage higher away from getting addicted to the prescription meds, whether they help or not. Prescription painkillers are ****ing insidious because you need them to function, but you need to up them because you build tolerance, and then when you taper it the pain gets even worse, and bing, boom, enjoy your new hardcore addiction.
I do not envy you. D:
My own fault, yes--but it was also over a decade ago, now. I've been homeless, I've watched people dealing coke in the parking lot, etc. My life hasn't been easy in the years since then--but I've never smoked meth again. I've never done any drug since then except smoke pot, smoke cigarettes, and drink tea. I haven't even been drunk in almost 8 years.
I'm not looking for vicodins from the doctor to get high. If I wanted to get high, I'd go and get high. There's nothing stopping me from that but myself. There never has been. I go to the doctor because I'm in pain, and I don't want to hurt all the time. I go to the doctor because my hand is cramping into a claw and I can't do the dishes. I go to the doctor because I lost three days last week to curling up and crying in my room from a migraine.
I guess my question is this: How long do I have to suffer to pay for one year of my teenage stupidity, and the failings of the family I was born into?
Honest answer (And I'm sure that I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know.); is until you are able to build up a good working relationship with a single primary physician who understands your medical history and that you really are in pain and not simply drug seeking. As I said before, I do sympathize with your situation for whatever that's worth though.
-
That is actually a really good point Svirfneblin although instead of being "fairly lucky" for not being fired I imagine that he must be "really good at his job" instead. --- It still doesn't make the SJW's temper tantrum about said shirt any less silly.
-
Except that the context is that the poem in question is not "obviously trans-misogynistic" at all.
As we all know, the best way to carry through some questionable statement is to start it with "obviously", "naturally" or "as we all know".
...Ooops. I did it, didn't I?
This thread is hilarious.
Hmm? That jab meant for me or the poster whom I was quoting?
No, I think he's saying that it's not obviously "transmisogynistic" at all. Because it's a joke. And if you are offended by it, whether you're a "transperson" or not, you're being ridiculous.
Got it, it's good to know that as long as it's a joke, it's never offensive to anyone. Let me brush up these racist Mexican and Asian jokes that I saw on the internet and tell it to my Mexican and Asian co-workers tomorrow. I'm sure they'll be perfectly fine with it, because you said so.
If we are on friendly terms and you can take what you dish out, as an Asian immigrant, you have my permission to make "racist" jokes.
And although I understand that as a member of the "elite overlords" it won't have the same impact ... feel free to make as many "Mick" jokes as you wish. Start with asking me about "my people's" idea of a seven course meal.
-
1
-
-
Which is why I'd rather not see actual "pariah races" included as PCs in the first place as it isn't reasonable to expect them to be done right.
-
2
-
-
Except that the context is that the poem in question is not "obviously trans-misogynistic" at all. As for childish name calling, meh ... that's the pot calling the kettle black at best.
-
1
-
-
And thus we come around full circle, given that apparently diagnosing pain isn't as advanced as I believed (I'll have to try to remember to ask my doctor about it on my next appointment while getting an estimate of how many more years I have before being forced to take the next step towards becoming a cyborg.) we're back to the problem that one man's seven is another man's three. (Of course, no matter which "solution" is used, self medication will still remain a problem.)
-
Not really because as subjective as those "1-10 pain scale charts" are, physical pain can be measured, verified and more importantly denotes an underlying condition.
Those charts actually exist because the pain cannot be measured, or verified. It's all subjective--what you say is an 8 might be a 5 to somebody else, etc. There is no "pain unit", no discreet measuring system. There is no way to objectively quantify pain.
Yep. This is, incidentally, a large part of why people with chronic pain issues have such a hard time getting the regular medication they need without meeting with suspicion that they're junkies or the like. It's a pretty serious problem that leaves many people suffering needlessly when their doctors won't believe them on what they're experiencing.
This is true. My fiance has Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; her main symptoms, beside dislocating joints and such, is simply severe chronic joint pain. I have a badly healed boxers fracture on my right hand and chronic arthritis in all of those knuckles, along with migraines. Both of us have real problems getting the pain medication we need because of this very issue.
Because obviously you guys suffering from severe pain your whole life is just the price one has to pay to keep those dirty drug-seekers from getting their hands on medication they don't deserve!
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that fortune has smiled on you in the sense that drug addiction (especially the insidious "But RX is safer." strain) hasn't touched you or yours in a major way. --- Although I can sympathize with Katarack and their fiancé, cracking down on pill mills is the lesser of the two evils, even if it means extra hoops to jump through for people who's need is real.
-
Partially linguistic shorthand and also partially because in pretty much every video game the different "species" are really just the "people of the silly hats".
-
Also, as a med student: although you can measure the physiological process of pain through a variety of methods, the phenomenon is so complex and - crucially - is an entirely subjective experience anyway, so there is no point in measuring it on an individual basis. There's a reason the scale of insect sting painfulness (the Schmidt sting pain index), for example, is only useful as a relative measure and has to use the subjective experience of a single person (Justin O. Schmidt) as a baseline.
Not really because as subjective as those "1-10 pain scale charts" are, physical pain can be measured, verified and more importantly denotes an underlying condition.
Those charts actually exist because the pain cannot be measured, or verified. It's all subjective--what you say is an 8 might be a 5 to somebody else, etc. There is no "pain unit", no discreet measuring system. There is no way to objectively quantify pain.
Well to be fair it's my understanding that it is indeed possible, albeit extremely impractical to measure the activity in the pain centers of someone's brain. And although you are technically correct in saying that what I consider to be a nine, you might call a seven, or even a three, physical pain does cause physical reactions that can indeed be verified ... for instance, it's fairly difficult to walk into a clinic (that is doing their due diligence and isn't simply a RX Mill) and walk out with pain meds simply by pointing at the chart and claiming a ten.
None of those physiological signs correlate directly; different people with the exact same symptoms can show different rates of acitivity in the "pain sensors", for example. A doctor or hospital judges your pain the same way you would somebody else, by looking for the signs of distress and emotional reaction, checking your physical symptoms to see if something could be causing the pain you claim, etc. They tend to be very cautious because there are laws about controlled substances; in general they will always err on the side of not giving you controlled drugs because of this.
There really is absolutely no way to objectively measure pain. They're working on it, but it doesn't exist.
Perhaps ... either way I think I'll revisit my response to sparklecat.
*EDITED QUOTE*
I think a large part of the issue is that by its very nature "phychological trauma" is subjective at best; I'm waiting for someone to provide me with an actual method to measure the "phychological trauma" that can be applied across the board to all groups, both those favored by the SJWs as well as those that aren't.
So rather like with physical pain, then?
Not really because as subjective as those "1-10 pain scale charts" are, physical pain may can be it can be measured, verified and more importantly denotes an underlying condition.
There .... now let's talk about the supposed "phychological trauma" instead.
-
Not really because as subjective as those "1-10 pain scale charts" are, physical pain can be measured, verified and more importantly denotes an underlying condition.
Those charts actually exist because the pain cannot be measured, or verified. It's all subjective--what you say is an 8 might be a 5 to somebody else, etc. There is no "pain unit", no discreet measuring system. There is no way to objectively quantify pain.
Well to be fair it's my understanding that it is indeed possible, albeit extremely impractical to measure the activity in the pain centers of someone's brain. And although you are technically correct in saying that what I consider to be a nine, you might call a seven, or even a three, physical pain does cause physical reactions that can indeed be verified ... for instance, it's fairly difficult to walk into a clinic (that is doing their due diligence and isn't simply a RX Mill) and walk out with pain meds simply by pointing at the chart and claiming a ten.
-
I think a large part of the issue is that by its very nature "phychological trauma" is subjective at best; I'm waiting for someone to provide me with an actual method to measure the "phychological trauma" that can be applied across the board to all groups, both those favored by the SJWs as well as those that aren't.
it can be measured, yes. Since pain no matter physical or mental is proccessed by the same areas of the brain. The pain climax however is a shock, not the issues that the ppl claim to lead to suicide or whatever. The so called "phychological trauma" is described by a gap in memory, not the other way around.
Interesting, but it sounds to me like you are describing PTSD as opposed to the nonsense that is being championed by the SJW crowd.
I think a large part of the issue is that by its very nature "phychological trauma" is subjective at best; I'm waiting for someone to provide me with an actual method to measure the "phychological trauma" that can be applied across the board to all groups, both those favored by the SJWs as well as those that aren't.
So rather like with physical pain, then?
Not really because as subjective as those "1-10 pain scale charts" are, physical pain can be measured, verified and more importantly denotes an underlying condition.
It's psychological Trauma?
it can be measured, yes. Since pain no matter physical or mental is proccessed by the same areas of the brain. The pain climax however is a shock, not the issues that the ppl claim to lead to suicide or whatever. The so called "phychological trauma" is described by a gap in memory, not the other way around.I think a large part of the issue is that by its very nature "phychological trauma" is subjective at best; I'm waiting for someone to provide me with an actual method to measure the "phychological trauma" that can be applied across the board to all groups, both those favored by the SJWs as well as those that aren't.
Like being molested by your mama?
There's no shame
It's just a game
But everyone loves a drama.
Ok, ok, I'll stop now.
Yeah ... let's stop comparing claiming to suffer trauma from reading a poem to being molested shall we?
*EDIT*
Katarack21 ... I don't know, why isn't there the same outrage when a gay bakery refuses to bake a "support traditional wedding" cake as there is when a Christian bakery refuses to bake a gay wedding cake?
-
I think it's more of a "why isn't there more of it" .... comment originally.
-
I think a large part of the issue is that by its very nature "phychological trauma" is subjective at best; I'm waiting for someone to provide me with an actual method to measure the "phychological trauma" that can be applied across the board to all groups, both those favored by the SJWs as well as those that aren't.
-
1
-
-
You see I would tend to disagree, if racial tensions are part of the background setting then being able to "fix them" just ... cheapens ... the entire concept to me.
-
1
-
-
Naw ... even if the devs did come out with that statement many people simply wouldn't believe them; hells, people (myself included) already don't believe their statement that the limerick wasn't vetted prior to being included in the game in the first place. (Whether Sawyer saw it personally or not may be a different story however.)
*EDIT*
Sure, but at the same time its in extremely poor taste to go to your neighbor's house and start a screaming, kicking hissy fit because you find something on display that is offensive.
" smile across his face when making this thread.
Petition: Remove time limit for forum post edits
in Obsidian General
Posted
Ah, thanks for the clarification.