Fighter

Fair enough.

You can believe whatever you like. Yet it was you who proclaimed there is a significant percentage of women that are stronger than anyone here even though as you point out it's the internet and you've got no idea who everyone is. I'm not being unreasonable. How many people proportion wise in the world, men or women, are even athletic above the average reasonably fit person. Small percentage. Among the women in this category how many are even strength or martial arts athletes at all. Tiny, tiny, tiny percentage compared to the whole population. And the percentage that are great at it is even tinier.

If your outside observer doesn't understand what is being talked about. It's like comparing two football teams and then someone saying, "But you can't play in any of them." And let me just be arrogant and pet my self on the back since you're trying to shame people. I'm pretty strong even for a man and trained since I was little. The women that are stronger than me are probably points of a percent if not less most likely.

#fullretard PS. I'm too lazy to check if it is actually true.

It is a joke. They do this because Ukrainians kept saying there are no local rebels in the east just Chechens sent from Russia.

Publishers playing everything safe and being afraid of innovation for financial reasons are not a good comparison to the moral police brigade.

Volo that's a silly suggestion and you know it is But everyone is equal and all differences are social. What's the problem?

These are the same people that would never accept this kind of generalization of any "opressed" group.

The gaming media is basically been made into this unified voice by making it essentially taboo and risky to have a different opinion on the matters of social issues. You risk being branded a bigot, losing your job or have no chance of being hired into this industry in the first place if your opinion doesn't fall in line. At best you can be quiet. And this has nothing to do with objective market trends but with a vocal minority that has a monopoly on right and wrong. They have cleansed the gaming media and now they want to do the same with the content of games which they've decided needs policing like the real world to create the "right" teaching environment (since that's what they seem to want to do) for the mindless apes -- that apparently can't handle entertainment without the correct moral message -- they see people as. This is the "conspiracy". Obviously it's not some feminist illuminati ordering people around behind the scenes but there are facts that show how all these people are cooking in the same pot. How they all have the same advisers and meet up to discuss the same subjects and ideas as a group. Then they all come out with the same kind of content like this latest rebranding of gamers. Groupthink kinda thing. Like I said before, it's not about diversity. They think everything you do even as an adult and even as escapist entertainment should be like your mom, teaching you the good lessons. At some point we've stopped viewing people as rational human beings who know fiction from reality by default, who are allowed to explore in entertainment the things they would never do otherwise, be it violent or shallow or whatever without the SJW voice in you tale reminding you about the right way of seeing the world like you're a moron. They've decided that there is no such thing as "it's just a game". And you have to express your real world morality in a world that's not real even when you specifically want to explore something other than. Because it hurts no one, it is just a game, it's all imaginary -- and policing the imaginary makes you the thought police. When they are finished with matters of representation -- or rather when they are "done" with masculinity -- they will go the Jack Thompson route and declare that games make you violent. There are already hints to this direction. Call it silly but they really would like Gone Home to be the standard.

This is useless. These photos are out there now. Forever.

No one wants to "keep women down". No one wants them out of games. No one hates women for being women. No one wants to prevent the industry from targeting women/gays/whoever. There isn't anyone like this save for a few even among those who hurl insults and threats. This misogyny thing doesn't exist. What people don't like is the outrage culture and bulling tactics where people have to be ashamed that they are men making games for men with distinctly male fantasies in them. There are a lot of these social justice minded types who see those male centric things as offensive and don't just want diversity, they want developers to stop making those things. They don't want an industry with a thousand voices, they want unified standards when it comes to what indulgences men are permitted to have by making the things they don't like taboo by labelling people bigots, misogynists, and wierdos. People realizing women are a viable market segment is not a big deal. People fretting over inclusion any time they have an idea that's not targeted at everyone because they are afraid of a scandal by all the crybabies that control the discussion is a big deal.

Gone Home... I don't even know how this got so many accolades. The revolutionary environmental storytelling that everyone raves about is not revolutionary at all, many games have used those tools. The main story is told through journal entries, a widely used method. The story itself is a complete cliché. I don't get what people see there. There are a few puzzles, barely worth a mention. Dear Esther is a pain to "play".

So Jen Frank writes an article for The Guardian defending Zoe Quinn who she pays money through Patreon while Zoe's PR agent Maya Kramer pays Jen Frank again through Patreon. I don't think the few dollars they pay each other through Patreon is such a big deal. But this is just hilariously not how journalism is supposed to work. You. just. can't. do. this. ****.

Wow. So I've just been briefly skimming through the links related to Silverstring Media from that video. It's kinda creepy. The entire thing about the 'gamer identity' seems to originate in this feminist article from 2013. And considering this "PR company" is connected to so many gaming sites AND Anita Sarkissian (who's listed as an advisor for them)... ...that is a conflict of interest if I saw one. I mean how can these sites presume to honestly cover her and everything around her with those types of connections? All these sites that are linked to the same PR firm putting out those identical "gamer identity articles" that stem from an older work connected to their PR firm... This is eerily sounding like a conspiracy. This is something that apparently comes from them: That is just creepy regardless of what you think about their proclaimed social justice goals how these people are connected to the gaming media and to Sarkissian whom the gaming media is supposed to cover honestly.

This is just hilarious.

Whoever you are you're doing it right lady: http://instagram.com/p/owvRWbD3dK/

I don't believe in conspiracy theories but these "Death of Gamers" articles appear freakishly coordinated and as if designed to push a common agenda. Also they are nearly going full retard. http://gamasutra.com/blogs/DevinWilson/20140828/224450/A_Guide_to_Ending_%20quotGamersquot.php Someone call Jack Thompson and all the rest of them. And then they tell people "no one is trying to take your games away"? Right. We can't just unload and have fun anymore we need to be indoctrinated with the agenda these guys deem relevant.

If said conclusion uses exceptions to make a generalization about gender then it is false. There were successful women warriors in both distant and more recent past, we all know this. They were a blip on the radar comparatively to how many men there were. Why? Because men are better suited for that kind of activity as they develop physically easier than women and have a bigger potential. People like the idea that "the only difference between men and women is social" and don't like to hear about areas where it's just not true. Like this.

Oh for the love of god... When people say, "We don't know that men were stronger, faster, etc, etc," one reasonably assumes we are talking about the average.

That many famous people keep nude photos on their phones? Did they not learn?

You say, "You will have to ask a biologist." But you're the archaeologists who are making these interpretations it is you who should ask a biologist before making these conclusions. You've found out that men and women were closer in size back then and you've made a whole bunch of assumptions that go against basic biology.

I'm talking about the average. I really did not think I would have to say it. The strongest and fastest of women never were and never will be (unless we evolve somehow) as strong or as fast as the strongest and fastest of men. On average this will always show. No they are not. Equal food and equal work will produce a stronger male. This is a scientific fact unless you are going to tell me women in the past had the same amounts of testosterone as men. If what you say were true women and men could compete in physical sports without the division. But they can't.

You had me until this. The time between then and now is pitifully small in evolutionary terms for the kind of changes you speak of. Men are bigger, stronger, faster etc, etc.

"The only way of avoiding becoming a victim is to stay off the internet." Hyperbole much? I would imagine that's like saying the only way of avoiding becoming a victim of a falling meteorite is to never go outside.

-_^