Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Longknife]

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

 

 

The difference being a dog will beg you for another salty chip and by no means do anything to suggest it's bad for them, but loathe being covered in dye.

[Walsingham]

 

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

 

 

The difference being a dog will beg you for another salty chip and by no means do anything to suggest it's bad for them, but loathe being covered in dye.

 

 

They also object to ... ah what the hell. I was just making the point.

[Keyrock]

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

If you want to give her the benefit of the doubt, that's your prerogative.  As I've written, I'm willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt for a one time mistake, after that I will not.  Again, as it relates to her right to keep a pet, I don't think it matters.  Whether it was willful abuse, ignorance, or stupidity, that doesn't make the mistreatment any less real, and the fact that she's done this multiple times leads me to believe she will continue to do it.  The dog is still getting abused regardless of intention.  Whether she's too cruel to have a dog or too stupid to have a dog, I feel she shouldn't be allowed to have a dog.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Keyrock

[BruceVC]

 

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

If you want to give her the benefit of the doubt, that's your prerogative.  As I've written, I'm willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt for a one time mistake, after that I will not.  Again, as it relates to her right to keep a pet, I don't think it matters.  Whether it was willful abuse, ignorance, or stupidity, that doesn't make the mistreatment any less real, and the fact that she's done this multiple times leads me to believe she will continue to do it.  The dog is still getting abused regardless of intention.  Whether she's too cruel to have a dog or too stupid to have a dog, I feel she shouldn't be allowed to have a dog.

 

 

Keyrock I'm worried you are going to inadvertently and unnecessarily  end relationships in your life if you really only give people one chance...surely you have family members and friends where you given them more than one chance?

Edited December 21, 2014 by BruceVC

[Meshugger]

I am much more inclined to believe that Keyrock is a reasonable person with a good set of standards compared to blue haired girl. The very idea to coloring your dog shows that you a child-like mentality to begin with.

[Meshugger]

Derek Smart weighs into the discussion:

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/546668184196382720?lang=en

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sjc2q7

 

I'll let you gentlemen make up your own minds about this.

 

I am much more inclined to believe that Keyrock is a reasonable person with a good set of standards compared to blue haired girl. The very idea to coloring your dog shows that you a child-like mentality to begin with.

Not only that, but most vets seem to agree that it's a HORRIBLE THING TO DO TO A DOG. I can forgive ignorance once, but continuing to abuse an animal without bothering to check and see if it's potentially harmful is not acceptable. People who own pets should at least bother to read up on care of those pets, particularly if they want to groom(for lack of a better word) the animal on an unorthodox manner. If something isn't widely done, there very well may be a damn good reason for doing so.

[Keyrock]

 

 

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

If you want to give her the benefit of the doubt, that's your prerogative.  As I've written, I'm willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt for a one time mistake, after that I will not.  Again, as it relates to her right to keep a pet, I don't think it matters.  Whether it was willful abuse, ignorance, or stupidity, that doesn't make the mistreatment any less real, and the fact that she's done this multiple times leads me to believe she will continue to do it.  The dog is still getting abused regardless of intention.  Whether she's too cruel to have a dog or too stupid to have a dog, I feel she shouldn't be allowed to have a dog.

 

 

Keyrock I'm worried you are going to inadvertently and unnecessarily  end relationships in your life if you really only give people one chance...surely you have family members and friends where you given them more than one chance?

 

My personal life is none of your business.  If I wanted people to concern themselves with it I would broadcast it on social media like all the attention whores out there.   Your feigned concern is neither appreciated nor welcome.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Keyrock

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Surely it's not unreasonable to assert that if someone does something to themselves then it's plausibly ignorant for them to think it won't hurt another animal?

 

I've seen many people feed salty chips to dogs. Without any thought to the fact that dogs can't handle salt the way we can. Doesn't make them abusers.

If you want to give her the benefit of the doubt, that's your prerogative.  As I've written, I'm willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt for a one time mistake, after that I will not.  Again, as it relates to her right to keep a pet, I don't think it matters.  Whether it was willful abuse, ignorance, or stupidity, that doesn't make the mistreatment any less real, and the fact that she's done this multiple times leads me to believe she will continue to do it.  The dog is still getting abused regardless of intention.  Whether she's too cruel to have a dog or too stupid to have a dog, I feel she shouldn't be allowed to have a dog.

 

 

Keyrock I'm worried you are going to inadvertently and unnecessarily  end relationships in your life if you really only give people one chance...surely you have family members and friends where you given them more than one chance?

 

My personal life is none of your business.  If I wanted people to concern themselves with it I would broadcast it on social media like all the other attention whores out there.   Your feigned concern is neither appreciated nor welcome.

 

 

Wow, sorry for asking.....no need to bite my head off 

[Blarghagh]

+1 for that Derek Smart post

 

Also, I don't really want to get into this because **** it, I'm not touching that insane woman with a ten yard stick, but dyeing a dog is not a harmless type of abuse, it can have serious consequences to the quality of the animals fur and its ability to survive bad weather and let's not even get into the fact that dogs clean themselves in a way that makes it extremely likely they will ingest dye or residue of it and get sick or die. This cannot be excused by saying "it was just an ignorant attempt to be closer to the animal". Even if it were, an animal is not a fashion accessoire and this animal needs to be taken away from this women especially considering the amount of times it was dyed before being high enough for chances of nobody telling her this to be absolute zero. Even if it was just out of ignorance, this isn't just a "I didn't know the marker I used on your face was permanent" type ignorance, this is horrific "I didn't know shaking the baby could kill it" type ignorance. A pet is a living creature and it is your bloody responsibility to know how to take care of it and if you don't know then you don't deserve to have it.

Edited December 21, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[kirottu]

Derek Smart weighs into the discussion:

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/546668184196382720?lang=en

 

I somehow read that as Maxwell Smart. Now I'm sad.

[Keyrock]

 

Derek Smart weighs into the discussion:

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/546668184196382720?lang=en

 

I somehow read that as Maxwell Smart. Now I'm sad.

 

I wonder if Derek Smart owns a Cone of Silence?

[Malcador]

Derek Smart weighs into the discussion:

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/546668184196382720?lang=en

Coke machines beware, Smart's back!

 

As for the freebsdgirl doing stupid things with her dog, it's just a fun hammer to beat her with.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Malcador

[Gorgon]

We can torture and kill eachother to our hearts content but if someone dyes a dog blue, that is simply inexcusable. 

[Keyrock]

We can torture and kill eachother to our hearts content but if someone dyes a dog blue, that is simply inexcusable. 

Who here has said killing and torturing people is okay?

[Gorgon]

I guess you can call it a comment on what people seem to think is important. 

[Keyrock]

I guess you can call it a comment on what people seem to think is important. 

Just so I'm not misunderstanding, you're not comparing killing virtual people in a video game to abusing a real dog in real life, right?  Because that would be ridiculous.

[Blarghagh]

We can torture and kill eachother to our hearts content but if someone dyes a dog blue, that is simply inexcusable. 

 

Or, you know, picking one option doesn't exclude the other and both things are awful? Unless you're comparing real animal abuse with virtual murder of video game characters, in case I would say the amount of wolves and boars I have murdered for their pelts and livers is beyond measure and is probably a good indication that video game killing has nothing to do with real life.

[Gorgon]

Dog looked a little unhappy. Like when forced to have a bath. No biggie.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

We can torture and kill eachother to our hearts content but if someone dyes a dog blue, that is simply inexcusable.

 

 

Or, you know, picking one option doesn't exclude the other and both things are awful? Unless you're comparing real animal abuse with virtual murder of video game characters, in case I would say the amount of wolves and boars I have murdered for their pelts and livers is beyond measure and is probably a good indication that video game killing has nothing to do with real life.

I'm going to give Gorgon the benefit of the doubt that he's referring to real world stuff. That said, I'm willing to condemn both because they're both wrong.

[kirottu]

 

 

Derek Smart weighs into the discussion:

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/546668184196382720?lang=en

 

I somehow read that as Maxwell Smart. Now I'm sad.

 

I wonder if Derek Smart owns a Cone of Silence?

 

 

I would pay good money to see someone tweet via shoe phone and by good money I mean everything up to 1€. 

[Blarghagh]

Dog looked a little unhappy. Like when forced to have a bath. No biggie.

 

Did you in complete honesty, seriously just compare dyeing a dog to giving it a bath? I hope you don't have a dog, because like I said before if you don't know how to take care of a dog (i.e. knowing what could bloody well kill the poor sod in more ways than one) then you should not be allowed to have one and you obviously don't know how. The fact that this woman's dog is still alive after all this time is pure luck. Unless you use food coloring, there is no safe way to dye a pet (don't let "special for dogs dye!" fool you, it's bull).

 

Hairdye is specifically made for human beings and is still bad for our hair and our skin, guess what it can do when it's poured all over the body (with a high likelyhood of it getting into that dogs eyes, orifices etc. unlike when used on a human) of an animal that can have entirely different reactions to it? A human has an allergic reaction to hairdye, worst case scenario is we have a swollen or itchy head for a few days. Worst case scenario for a dog is that they are covered head-to-toe in blisters and possibly die from shock. Then there's the fact that it damages their fur, I don't give a crap if a human being damages their own hair as a choice but a dog doesn't get to make that choice and their fur is pretty essential to survival. And as I pointed out in my last post, what do dogs do to clean themselves? They will be ingesting either straight dye or dye residue and can get seriously sick and even die. But hey, "no biggie".

Edited December 21, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[Gorgon]

I have to admit I never considered that anyone would do that on a regular basis. I assume it was a one off. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I have to admit I never considered that anyone would do that on a regular basis. I assume it was a one off.

 

The first img Messhugger posted has her saying she's done it several times.

[Meshugger]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sjc2q7

 

I'll let you gentlemen make up your own minds about this.

 

Bill Hicks was right then and now about our current culture. The good people are killed and scared off, all while we let the demons run amok.