Longknife

Oh god....brace yourselves everyone, I'm about to go off again. You know what is bitterly, BITTERLY ironic here Bruce? The very reason Mercedes acknowledged me and we had a brief chat (which ended in her welcoming me to message her on twitter, which I damned well might make a twitter account for), you know why it was...? Well you can hunt the Youtube comments on that vid yourself and just Cntrl + F and search for "Longknife," or if you're too lazy for that, I'll tell you: It's because I commented on how tragic I found it that she's so wonderfully capable, intelligent, charitable and charming, and yet I fear a large portion of the community will not bother to give her the time of day and listen to her because she's a porn star with her boobs out. I had never heard of Mercedes before this event, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the exact kind of person I love to hang out with and try to surround myself with. And sure enough she actually replied to me, as if there was some level of understanding when I expressed that concern. I also commented on my own personal theory that the very people who would argue a woman with her boobs out cannot be taken seriously are probably the very people who will NOT take her seriously, because I sure as hell "enjoy the view" and yet I enjoy her insights and her take on things even more. I might get in touch with her not out of some perverse desire to be like "OMG YEAH I CHATTING WITH A HOTTIE MAYBE I'LL SEE HER BOOBS" (which wtf I could google for), but because I'm genuinely interested in chatting with her, if she's open to it. Just because I like a woman who sexualizes herself does not mean I cannot appreciate other aspects of her, but this seems to be a part of the SJW argument (at least in regards to what we've heard from Polygon or Anita or the like) that sexualizing women is a problem. It dismisses sex-positive women as a problem and as something that sets women back, so I suspect those very same people would not give Mercedes the time of day or bother to hear her out. And here you are dismissing the interview, not acknowledging it or commenting on it, because she's a porn star and you "already watch enough porn." You wanna talk sexist? That statement was sexist. You basically just dismissed her interview as just an extension of porn and that it would add nothing to the debate or discussion or to the reasons you come here. And I can hear it now: "Gee Longknife I was just joking!" Yeah, the very same way you're not convinced Volourn isn't homophobic? I'm not convinced that's nothing more than an excuse, and that you don't WANT to watch the video, because the video displays THE most elegant speaker on the matter we've seen thusfar, and she just so happens to be a pro-GG Porn star with an Engineering degree who experienced absolutely zero sexism in her work with the sciences (amidst the community responsible for Shirtgate) and recently had her own charitable work denied because of her GG stance. But no, she has her boobs out, so what could she possibly add...?

Btw? Mercedes just replied to my Youtube comment. In your face, anti-GG. My stance gets me attention from a porn star.

A porn star replied to a youtube comment I made. Get on my level, scrubs.

C0cker Spaniels can make me cry manly tears. They so god damned stupid....and yet they're so god damned friendly and just happy to be alive. I've only ever owned C0ckers and the impact they have on the mood of your house cannot be overstated, though you'll probably only realize what you had once it's gone... ;C

Including this wonderfully charming and intelligent porn star who attempted charity work on behalf of disabled gamers, and all anti-GG seems to consider her is a sl*t who attempted to weaponize charity: Maybe if they would bother to listen to her ****ing speak instead of going on rants about how sexualized women are seen only as sexual objects and not valued for the things they can do or say, they'd learn a damned thing or too, as well as hear someone with a god damn engineering degree tell them that this idea that getting into the sciences as a woman is difficult and women are discriminated against is nothing but wild fiction in her experience. But no, she has her boobs out. Therefore she cannot be smart or insightful, can she?

I could've told us that. That's law 101. You may open up a lawbook and read that theft is "forcefully taking someone else's property away from them," (or something like that, I know the German counterparts) and it makes sense at face value, but behind EVERY single word in that sentence (save for "from" and "them") is a specific definition used by lawyers and judges alike, and the definition must be reviewed in full when trying to prove someone is guilty of theft. Every. Single. Word. They all have meaning and purpose and if you don't understand them perfectly, you cannot move forward. That's kind of why, as I've said, these guys must be on the opposite end of the spectrum from law studies because they seem to have thinking patterns literally opposite from what would be expected from you should you pursue a law degree. Analytical thinking is key, objectivity is key, and taking things step by step while trying to detach yourself from emotional impulses is key. This is the very same reason I take issue with feminism in the sense I cannot fathom why Anita Sarkeesian, Emma Watson and Christine Sommers all INSIST on carrying this title to the end of the earth and back when it's very very obvious that each and every one of them has drastically different stances on what feminism is but all three desire to coin the same term and make it their own. They're only polluting society's view of their philosophy by inadvertedly associating with people with drastically different views from their own. However, I also think this (the picture's suggestion) wouldn't work as it'd be called "sealioning." Still, worth a shot, but my hopes aren't high.

https://archive.today/zv6Ml#selection-713.0-713.140 Seriously, **** this guy. Next person to tell me GG is a hate movement, I'm going to make them explain exactly what that comment is.

You all are welcome to apply this or not apply this to the degree you choose, but I find this guy's insights to be fascinating regardless of relevance: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sj2pr9

Progress for women in gaming = lead them to lose all their jobs...? i has confus

WTF kind of way is that of talking about another nation. I believe it's called racism to any reasonable person. Yeah!!! Any non-racist person knows the radiation only caused the Japanese to be really f***ing weird, not sexist.

Postal 2 DLC references GG: http://i.imgur.com/xekh4bJ.jpg

Also, now taking suggestions on how to use my powers for good/evil. This is my chance to either give an inspirational speech on behalf of the disabled or to go **** with the anti-side and see how willing they are to listen to ridiculous claims I make just cuz I disabled.

Also can I just say it feels weird as **** to be a part of the group that is the topic and/or chesspiece involved in the latest charity dispute or social justice cause? It's like holy ****, **** off and let me/us say what I/we want.

Yeah McIntosh cause you've done just a CRACKERJACK JOB of respecting majority opinion and democratic values thusfar. :D

I think the only thing Target potentially "did wrong" is I personally question the ingenuity of the ban in the sense that I personally believe the people they just catered to are in the minority. Yes yes, I can "believe" all I like, but without facts to back it up, nothing will change. Well, I believe someone posted a link in this thread to a poll that showed 63% of polled people considering it a bad choice on Target's part. Can't remember if I found it here and didn't think to make a mental note of it, unfortunately. I'm good at collecting info for myself, not so good at sharing it, admittedly. Aside from that though, check this: https://www.change.org/p/kmart-continue-to-sell-grand-theft-auto-5-in-australia I'm willing to bet they'll get more signatures than the ban petition. This petition is currently two days old and has 18,000 signatures. Comparatively, the ban petition had 13,000 signatures after four days. So yeah, while I respect Target's right to ban whatever they like and also respect a system of listening to the majority or simply what's the most profitable for a company (cause perhaps you'd need an overwhelming majority before a product became unprofitable to carry), I would LOVE to hear the rationale behind the ban, as from everything I know and from all that I've seen, the ban seems short sighted to me...

I just wanna mention... I'm by no means a criminology expert, but where I study it's a course you have to take for a law degree. For those who don't know, Criminology is the study of what makes a criminal a criminal, more or less. It looks into the causes of crime to try and understand it and prevent it, and I like to think it's also to teach would-be politicians and prosecutors a bit of empathy. One of the causes of crime is indeed boredom. That's not to say all crime is caused by boredom - of course not - but it is worth noting that boredom does escalate crime to a degree. Boredom can lead to some weird **** like surfing on top of a train and seeing if you can duck before you reach the bridge underpass. Thrillseekers start going nuts in the face of boredom; some surf on trains, some commit crime for the thrill of getting away and avoiding getting caught. So yes, to a degree video games can actually be preventative. Small sample of how significant it is? My book by my professor for Criminology covers causes of crime in pages 185 - 309, pages 265 - 309 are about boredom and media and how they influence crime. I'd recommend the book but German. :C From a purely criminological view, violent media can distract people from violent realities, although the idea would still be that non-violent alternatives would still be better. Ideally yes, there'd be no violent media but some studies have connected a drop in crime with the rise of video games. Violent media is frowned upon in general because for example suicide rates spike during news of a famous suicide and as such the drive towards violence rises aswell, but with video games many people now satiate that drive via video games. Studies have also shown a spike in one's mindset towards violence, but most specifically within kids and younger teens. One guy who did a study even explicitly stated he thinks the lesson from his results is to pay attention to what's shown (is it violent or not), how is it shown (is it encouraged, discouraged, mocked, made a joke, etc), how much is shown, and who is watching it under what circumstances. In short...there's really no conclusive statement that it encourages or discourages anything because a lot of it seems case by case. Yes, kids for example should not be watching violent media because they're young and impressionable. Comparatively grown idiots might use violent media as an outlet to keep them from being far more idiotic out on the streets. And yes it's worth mentioning that from a purely Criminological view, a world without violent media would be ideal for slowing crime. Reading that, I'm beginning to wonder if the SJW side is actually intent on making what I consider an impossibility a reality. It's funny cause my professor never spoke poorly of violent media, but rather acknowledged things like the existence of copycat crimes as a sad reality and had learned to laugh off how simple-minded humanity can be, but perhaps these people are convinced something can actually be done about it... As for sexual crimes, I don't know of any statistics I've seen personally, but I'd assume it'd be more or less the same, as a video game (or other media) gives people a safe outlet to meet their desires with.

What the hell happened...? https://archive.today/GT5ne

Good thing we kept ridiculous hyperboles out of the conversation!!

Prostitutes are an aknowledged part of reality in GTA 5.

And organized protest, critique and condemnation functions as a type of "choice" does it not? Or is choice merely limited to praying to the gods someone might make a product that doesn't contain x negative trend. You are suggesting that "live and let live" is a loser mentality and that everyone should act as a holy crusader that will stop at nothing to change the world into something they agree with. Pro-tip: Crusades and a refusal to accept the existence of dissenting opinion is how innocent people wind up dead with the justifcation being that the innocent people were not so innocent.

Far more effective strategy than silent consumerism. At what point did he suggest he would silently consume such media? He suggested people make their own choices. In the scenario you've named, he would find himself not consuming or supporting such media, he just wouldn't be killing off millions of people either like you seem to think would be an appropriate response. And again:

It is a ridiculous and pointless extremist argument that, yes, I don't really want to engage with. But ok, in principle yes I do think no subject matter should be forbidden in fiction, no matter what. No serious developer will ever make a child rape simulator outside of obscure Japanese hentai games and none will ever become popular. If we're to take his argument seriously, let me ask a counter-question: What do you propose one should do in the event they find themselves existing in a world where child rape simulators are as dominant of a genre as first-person shooters are today, Barothmuk? The most you can do is voice disapproval yourself. You can say you don't like the game and consider it morally appalling, and either the culture will listen to you or not. If they do, hooray, if they don't, sad day for you but no one is forcing you to play these games. Are you suggesting that in such an event, a person should hijack the USA nuclear missle launch system and bomb the developers headquarters and houses into oblivion? /ridiculous hyperbole

...Wait a minute. I just got really confused while typing up a post. McIntosh & Anita = Feminist McIntosh & Anita = So pro-better-treatment-of-Muslims that they find celebrating Osama bin Laden's death disgusting but celebrating that "warhawk" guy's death totally called for. ...Are they aware Muslim culture is pretty ****ing sexist? Like let me clarify my personal approach is pretty hands-off and let them have their own culture, but surely a feminist spokesperson voicing support for muslims comes off a bit...odd? Yeah you can support less bigotry against muslims cause lord knows the west needs that, but it STILL feels so weird and surreal coming from a feminist. We're talking about countries where a woman can be killed for claiming she was raped if she cannot prove it without a shadow of a doubt, or where a woman can be killed for going outside without being accompanied by a man.

Sure they are. Does he actually support content being decided purely by silent consumer choices or does he have his own standard he wishes enforced? Would it having millions of dollars in marketing affect his perception of its production/distribution? What if it became really popular and the majority of games followed suite featuring simulated child-rape, would he still silently buy from an ever decreasing market of non-rape games or would he say "What the ****? Piss of with the rape."