Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Draugr

Real Name Draugr   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Draugr
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On May 5, 2006, 20:54
Total Comments 612 (Apprentice)
User ID 24786
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ] Older >


News Comments > etc.
91. Re: etc. Jan 30, 2012, 00:48 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 23:41:
Mostly this means contributions to technology, but also religion is big factor as well. Remember, I am not religious despite this. When it comes down to it, black people have not contributed anything to society.

In any case, why shouldn't white people have a "White Pride" time set aside? Is there another, of course this encompasses a great many races, race that deserves it more? Others may have invented some of the tech we now hold for granted, but it was white people that put it to work and created the nations you now take for granted. I am not saying I want to see a "white pride day" happen, I am just saying I see the fallacy in "black pride day". If you do not, then once again, keep drinking that kool-aid.

You are no different than those who deny that we landed on the moon. Rabid narcissism, irrational stately obedience, reckless demonisation. These are your tools, not mine. Enjoy them while they last.


Wow. Getting off topic much? how did this become a discussion of black history month? Since you've shown your 'true colors' I'll indulge myself by responding, despite the fact that bigotry plays a major role in your life.
It's funny how you tried to set the bar of what 'contributions to society' means, and you still are wrong. Black people have contributed much to society(which you define contributions as either technology or religion), starting with...the dawn of mankind. Stone ax? That's technological advancement.
We can get closer to our time, since you might want to pretend that it doesn't count as technology. How about looking at Lewis Howard Latimer. You've seen an incandescent lightbulb; Edison invented it, What Latimer improved upon is what gives you the lightbulb in its current form, essentialy. We could get even more recent if we wanted to, but If you want to see them just follow the link, no reason to clutter this space with more off topic info. Just because you can't think of it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Here is a whole list of African/black people, in general and specific people, contributions to Science, Medicine, and Technology, From the past and present day.
http://www.pps.k12.or.us/depts-c/mc-me/be-af-sc.pdf

I guess there isn't much more to say, this isn't really on topic and I don't feel like filling up this space with more off topic stuff. Someone might actually want to contribute something to the discussion instead of just insulting people who disagree with them, and thanks for pouring in your racism, it helps show how backwards your positions are.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
83. Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 23:01 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 22:30:
Draugr wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 21:24:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 19:18:
Beamer wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 18:11:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 22:41:
Ithen they should have NO PROBLEM with "straight only" groups, right? I won't even get into how they stir in all the anti-religion bullshit just to get their way. I will just say, they are all mental midgets with no clue what they really want, they just know they want more, and more, and more. This will not end well...


Oh my god, I did not just read this comment.


Hey, what about White People Appreciation Month!?




Have you ever noticed how dumb that argument is?

No, but I have noticed how dumb your argument is. I would also like to thank you for bringing race into this, as it has many parallel issues with this situation and I was debating bringing it up just for comparisons sake.



I have a somewhat unique perspective on this, as my race(which does happen to be a shade of white) was interned during the last world war, and yet we receive no compensation for it, nor has any been asked for. Yet we(sovereign nations) must bend over backwards for others who had the same happen to them, and it still doesn't seem to be enough because apparently it's a debt that can never be repaid. Of course if we speak out about it, we are labeled as racists/bigots or w/e other cop out labels what have you.

In short, you've been drinking the kool-aid of political correctness for far too long, and you don't want to go down this road with me...

You won't go down the road with anyone, you just pretend like people are too stupid to actually spell your opinions out to, because its easier to write it off as opposed to see your argument get ripped to shreds.

Every response you make is basically 'well your too dumb to get it so i won't explain, BUT I'M RIGHT.' There are few replies you've made that don't take this tack, and it speaks more to the weakness of your argument, and your inability to defend it, than other peoples.

First and foremost example being, only white people can be racist. When black/asian/arab or whoever else does it, it's 'ok' because they are somehow entitled to such racist opinions, purportedly because they are a minority, when in reality, on a global scale, nothing could be further from the truth. If you don't see this, well, I am likely wasting keystrokes on you.

Hahaha, who, at any point, said that non-white people can't be racist? No one made that claim -- You insist they are, but no one did. People of different races are also racist, and they can even be racist towards their own race, Just as white people could!
Stop putting words into peoples' mouths, once again you bring out the straw man because you can't actually support your arguments.


Hey, what about White People Appreciation Month!?
Ok then, explain this genius. That fact is, that you are too dumb to realize what's going on, either that or you do realize but you don't care/are intentionally being obtuse to further a devious agenda. You stink of leftist ideals. Let me guess, you'll be voting 'Obama' again, right? Cause reality makes no difference to you, only your ideals matter.

And once again, you just pretend like people are too stupid to actually spell your opinions out to, because its easier to write it off as opposed to see your argument get ripped to shreds.

But if you insist, lets BRIEFLY go down this road (though it is certainly off topic.) I won't even need to insult you, as you clearly feel is necessary to arguing, as opposed to actually supporting your views...

The simple answer to this is, White people haven't had to deal with any serious racial setbacks. (white people certainly suffer setbacks, but it's rarely if ever due to their race, it usually has to do with their socio-economic conditions.)

The longer answer is, the goal of black history month is to educate people about a relatively narrow period of African history, the time period when Africans dispersed (either willingly or against their will) to other continents. It's also to instill a sense of pride in African American's cultural heritage, because hundreds of years of relentless racism will tend to take that away from you.

In American schools, most of what we learn is 'white history.' Whites have also never been discriminated against as a whole on race. Many white people are able to trace back family trees hundreds of years. Is there any need to instill pride in white people about their heritage?

-
I know how much you love to bring out the straw man, but lets try to avoid such fallacies and finally, lets get back on topic.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
75. Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 21:24 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 19:18:
Beamer wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 18:11:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 22:41:
Ithen they should have NO PROBLEM with "straight only" groups, right? I won't even get into how they stir in all the anti-religion bullshit just to get their way. I will just say, they are all mental midgets with no clue what they really want, they just know they want more, and more, and more. This will not end well...


Oh my god, I did not just read this comment.


Hey, what about White People Appreciation Month!?




Have you ever noticed how dumb that argument is?

No, but I have noticed how dumb your argument is. I would also like to thank you for bringing race into this, as it has many parallel issues with this situation and I was debating bringing it up just for comparisons sake.



I have a somewhat unique perspective on this, as my race(which does happen to be a shade of white) was interned during the last world war, and yet we receive no compensation for it, nor has any been asked for. Yet we(sovereign nations) must bend over backwards for others who had the same happen to them, and it still doesn't seem to be enough because apparently it's a debt that can never be repaid. Of course if we speak out about it, we are labeled as racists/bigots or w/e other cop out labels what have you.

In short, you've been drinking the kool-aid of political correctness for far too long, and you don't want to go down this road with me...

You won't go down the road with anyone, you just pretend like people are too stupid to actually spell your opinions out to, because its easier to write it off as opposed to see your argument get ripped to shreds.

Every response you make is basically 'well your too dumb to get it so i won't explain, BUT I'M RIGHT.' There are few replies you've made that don't take this tack, and it speaks more to the weakness of your argument, and your inability to defend it, than other peoples.

First and foremost example being, only white people can be racist. When black/asian/arab or whoever else does it, it's 'ok' because they are somehow entitled to such racist opinions, purportedly because they are a minority, when in reality, on a global scale, nothing could be further from the truth. If you don't see this, well, I am likely wasting keystrokes on you.

Hahaha, who, at any point, said that non-white people can't be racist? No one made that claim -- You insist they are, but no one did. People of different races are also racist, and they can even be racist towards their own race, Just as white people could!
Stop putting words into peoples' mouths, once again you bring out the straw man because you can't actually support your arguments.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
74. Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 21:24 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 05:39:
Draugr wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 05:14:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 04:13:

Family <-Hey look! It's an anti-gay smilely! lol...

I can see you are quite dense, or maybe my joke was just over your head, so I'll explain.

As you noted, that is the smiley for 'family' and you can see it's a male, a female, and a child. There are no 'gay family' smileys, so it was a sarcastic way of saying that this is something that gays would be upset about because they are clearly not being represented. Get it now?

Oh, I got the 'joke' but the real joke is that you think it would be offensive to homosexuals that nuclear families exist.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
38. Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 05:21 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 04:17:
Bhruic wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 04:11:
What happens when everyone is gay? No more babies.

Yes, because no gay person in the history of the world has ever had kids.

Oh, wait.

Being hetero- or homosexual affects your preference. It doesn't make you unable to have sex with the gender you don't prefer.

So does this mean you advocate prostitution? Maybe you can send your kids to the first school for it.

How is he advocating prostitution? What he states is matter of fact, and prostitution is an example of it, but it doesn't mean he advocates it, nor is prostitution relevant to the conversation. The fact is that some people have sex with people they aren't attracted to for X, Y or Z reason, so let's pack up the straw man for another time.

Also, lots of people have children without actually having sex, they are called surrogate mothers and straight and homosexual people both use them, there is also this process called adoption. Just because you have a child doesn't mean you had to have sex with someone, though it can be presupposed it for obvious reasons.

This comment was edited on Jan 29, 2012, 05:29.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
37. Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 05:14 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 04:13:

Family <-Hey look! It's an anti-gay smilely! lol...

How is a family anti-gay? Families and homosexuals can and already do coexist. Gay people have families, and belong to families.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
33. Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 03:41 Draugr
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 03:02:
Lorcin wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 02:54:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 02:40:

I agree marriage of any kind shouldn't be in games.

Oh please don't agree with me - I'm definitely not on your side. People want to get virtually married to other people they've met in game - why the hell not, it's not like marriage means anything in the real world these days anyway. Lord Satan knows as I've been married 13 years in RL we're WAY longer than the average length - but it's not the marriage certificate keeping us together, that's just a piece of paper we picked up so our kids wouldn't be bastards

My problem is these people who seem to think it's important their avatar can do the cyber nasty with a scripted NPC - it's no different to getting attached to a particular whore in GTA.

Oh look it's a flip flopper. You aren't a U.S. politician by chance are you?

Must also say I am greatly amused how everyone assumes I am religious. Hint: I'm not. Feel free to continue deluding yourselves though. Makes you look ohh so SMRT.

He's not flip flopping, he was just clarifying his position since you were trying to co-opt him into your position.

When is the last time you saw a "Straight people only." group in game?

It's not just games, there are plenty of organizations who have kicked people out for being gay. That means they are for 'Straight people only.' There are plenty of people who can tell you about getting kicked out of/off of a server/guild/clan for being gay, a simple Google search will net you results.

I love how the anti-gay activist uses the same exact logic as white-power activists.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Diablo III Cuts
61. Re: More Diablo III Cuts Jan 28, 2012, 16:58 Draugr
 
Alamar wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 16:17:
Couldn't wade through all the comments saying mostly the same thing...

But what I find curious is the reaction to the way Blizzard has worked (successfully) for what, 15-20 years...

Like any development company, games or otherwise, they come up with an early list of features, and flesh them out... As their long long ass development goes on, some features just don't feel as good in the game as they did on paper...

The choice at that point is to either spend more time on them, or not... Some features they don't like, they've been iterating on 'forever', and feel they're important enough to keep in... Others, not so much...

The biggest difference in this process now, compared to what it was when everyone loved Blizzard, is that they're more vocal now... Let that stew : ) They have always dropped intended features from every one of their (major franchise) games.

And while 'when it's done' means something to one person, I've always felt that to Blizzard, it meant, when the product is high enough quality for it to ship; not when every single feature they (or you) ever wanted in there, is perfect.

And lastly, as much as any of our Blue's readers want this in their (grubby little) hands (minus those griping about the 'new' greedy Blizzard), Blizzard wants it out that much more than you : )

Blizzard business practice as usual, with more visibility...

-Alamar

Yeah, stuff gets cut all the time, and people are none the wiser, I wouldn't even consider it a matter of them being more vocal, it's just they usually don't do such overhauls in beta (or they try to avoid it, anyway,) where everyone is exposed to it. Especially one of this magnitude. I'm fairly certain everyone understands what, 'When it's done.' means when they say it, they may want more features, these people exist in all game communities, but they know it means 'when blizzard is satisfied with the product.'

You put new in quotes, but in actuality Blizzard has been Merged with Activision for over 3 years now. You might not have complaints about directions they've taken, but to not acknowledge that they are under different leadership is just wrong. A lot of their structure stayed intact, because what they had works. That doesn't mean they still don't receive orders from The Activision-Blizzard umbrella. They are just expected to handle things on their own.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Diablo III Cuts
59. Re: More Diablo III Cuts Jan 28, 2012, 16:46 Draugr
 
hansmuff wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 16:28:
Draugr wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 16:18:
[...] I might just wait for a freind to be done with it then play their copy. [...]
That'll only work if he doesn't have other games in his battle.net account he wants to play while you play diablo 3.
Or he has to be willing to set up a separate bnet account just for d3 so that you can use it later.

Cpt. Obvious, coming in for landing.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Diablo III Cuts
56. Re: More Diablo III Cuts Jan 28, 2012, 16:18 Draugr
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 14:45:
I haven't played any of the previous games but I found DIII to be very enjoyable and I can see myself playing it a lot. I'm not at all concerned by the scale of the changes being made as I didn't come across any issues with the beta. No bugs, no glaring issues. My only complaint is the Blizzard downloader but at least it's not Origin.

Having played the beta myself, and previous diablo games,I'm still undecided, Im leaning towoards just wait for a freind to be done with it, then play their copy. Im not too excited about a lot of the changes they made, as they seem quite silly, (Not being able to switch between your abilities on the fly, for example.)

I know just by playing the demo I'm going to spend a fraction of the time playing Diablo 3 that I did Diablo 2. They are going to keep all of the stuff that keeps people around (drops, etc. All of the 'addictive' elements.) but they aren't going to be able to match the quality of gameplay diablo 2 had, and this is what's going to cut it short for me. It'll at least be fun for a bit. Activisions main concern is going to be making sure the real money AH is still generating them income, and all decisions are influenced by that.

This also makes me recall about how when the game was supposed to be released it was supposed to have a guild hall system in it. they took it out, and we never saw it. If this, and other cuts which they plan to release in the future went the same way, I don't think I'd be too surprised. The only difference this time around is the real money AH will be making them money, the question is, how much are they going to put back into Diablo 3?

And this headline is not innacurate, people. There were cuts to the game before, and here are some more. Many are willing to say this headline is just around to grab clicks, because it's not true, but they never explain why it's not true. You might consider it sensationalist (I personally do not.) But that doesn't make it untrue, and I think it's people who frequent this website would want to be aware of.

This comment was edited on Jan 28, 2012, 16:27.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Diablo III Cuts
37. Re: More Diablo III Cuts Jan 28, 2012, 03:04 Draugr
 
Creston wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 01:02:
We think we can make companion pets into a much cooler system (both mechanically and visually), and evolve the reforging scrolls into a more meaningful system at some point in the future

Ie, we feel that we should just take this feature out of the game, and charge you extra for it in the future in the form of DLC / expansion.

Creston

Ding, Ding, Ding!
X gets the square!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > PC Rayman Origins in March
6. Re: PC Rayman Origins in March Jan 26, 2012, 22:34 Draugr
 
Elf Shot The Food wrote on Jan 26, 2012, 22:27:
Prince of Persia got released DRM free at retail and was pirated like crazy. This probably will be too.

You say that as if DRM was included it wouldn't have been pirated.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > The Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition in April
2. Re: The Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition in April Jan 26, 2012, 21:03 Draugr
 
Here comes CDP to make everyone look bad. Again.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Splash Damage Plans Big 2012 Splash
31. Re: Splash Damage Plans Big 2012 Splash Jan 24, 2012, 19:28 Draugr
 
yuastnav wrote on Jan 24, 2012, 13:34:
Sphinx wrote on Jan 24, 2012, 13:28:
yuastnav wrote on Jan 24, 2012, 11:05:
Please tell me you are not serious. TFC/TF2 are nothing like Enemy Territory, I even dare say that ET was rather unique in its gameplay, not only concerning how the maps were designed and how the game mechanics worked but that every map had some background i.e. a small story behind it.
Team Fortress on the other hand never seemed very interesting to me.

From the simple fact about how many hours I sunk into Enemy Territory and TF2 they are exactly the same. So many, many hours wasted

Plus, some of the game mechanics were pretty similar but that comes with the whole team shooter territory I suppose.

Well, I have to admit that I am not overly familiar with Team Fortress, I always assumed that it is mostly CTF based whereas Enemy Territory seems to be based on achieving objectives.
I guess I'm probably wrong.
Still, no game will ever be like Enemy Territory (because no game engine will ever have the same movement as the Quake 3 engine *sigh*).

No, you're evaluation was pretty spot on. If you consider ET and TF identical you'd probably say that about most, if not all FPS's that have objectives and classes.

They have similarities, sure. I don't think its fair to lump them together as the same game though, they play quite differently.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
30. Re: Out of the Blue Dec 22, 2011, 19:44 Draugr
 
Bhruic wrote on Dec 22, 2011, 17:39:
Skyrim CPU patch

This patch will improve your frame rate by up to 40% in all CPU-dependent situations, i.e. especially in cities.
It works mostly by rewriting some x87 FPU code and inlining a whole ton of useless getter functions along the critical paths because the developers at Bethesda, for some reason, compiled the game without using any of the optimization flags for release builds.

You're my hero.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
81. Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 17:12 Draugr
 
Prez wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 16:49:
Draugr:

I appreciate you are concerned above all for equal treatment for all, but in my view you are letting easily manipulated stats give you a false sense of unfairness in the workplace that simply doesn't exist, and hasn't for a very long time.

Numbers are funny things. They could be made to dance a jig, and one set of data can be used to argue a point from both sides. Stats are worse - they don't ever tell the complete story, and are almost never represented honestly when used in discussions like these.

And the finger would point the same way, I would argue that the stats were being used to give a false sense of fairness. I've avoided using stats due to this particular weakness they can suffer from, I can only think of one stat I cited, and it was to prove a point, not provide evidence of privilege.

I will certainly agree with you. I've been very careful not to get too statistic heavy for that very reason,which is the same reason I was being critical of his post to begin with. I wasn't using stats as the basis for my argument, that was someone else. I can only think of one stat which I cited, My only point in showing stats was that things were being cherry picked, so while we can see a bunch of stats supporting someones argument, there are plenty of stats that don't support it, and when bringing in stats we can run into the problems you covered. When we look at a stat, or collection thereof, and then draw conclusion such as 'priveledge doesn't exist.' Then the statistics are not being used for their intended purpose. The only conclusion we could factually draw from the stats is (for example) More men serve in the military than woman. Numbers can be misleading, and aren't the only factors when considering issues such as these.

None of the stats listed were really produced in any meaningful way, and discusses nothing of the methodology when gathering the stats, or the samples used, and far from encompass all the issues that men and women are subject to, so they are moot.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
78. Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 16:13 Draugr
 
Morga wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 06:50:
Draugr:
Companies cannot get away with that, they could be sued for huge sums of money, and it also makes no sense at all, because if women did the exact same amount of work, worked similar amount of hours during their lives at companies, studies the same majors etc and cost less, then companies have no reason to hire male employees, if they cost more for they same work.


“If they can pay women less, why don't they just hire all women.” This argument – or some variation of it – is commonplace among anti-feminists
This argument sounds logical enough – so long as we assume that no other factors aside from the wage gap are operating. But in the real-world economy, other factors are always operating. (Curiously enough, this flawed logic can be used to “prove” not only that discrimination against women doesn’t exist, but also that racial discrimination doesn’t exist, and furthermore that neither racial nor sexual discrimination has ever existed.)

There are many reasons a workforce wouldn't/couldnt be replaced by all women, the biggest reason being discrimination. Another reason is the female workforce is not infinite; there aren’t enough women to fill all the jobs in the US currently held by men, in addition to the jobs women already have. Lets also not forget the transition costs of replacing all one’s male employees (especially in male-dominated workplaces) may well be higher than the costs of the wage gap; hiring and training new workers is very expensive. Those transition costs are even higher when you consider how unhappy and unmotivated the men will be to train their female replacements. Of course, The employer may simply be prejudiced, and thus willing to pay the extra price to avoid employing women in some positions (a conservative economist Gary Becker's, Theory). Ultimately, the employer has community relations – and customer relations – to worry about. Practicising discrimininating policies won't help those aspects.

There's various health departments for women, coalition for women and girls. Where are the male equivalents? Why is there no national coalition for men and boys? And still you believe in the fantasy that men are privileged lmao.

http://ncfm.org/ - that is the website for the National Coalition for Men, started in 1977. First hit on google when you type it in. Also the boyscouts have existed for ages, Before that (and for a while after) most institutions didn't allow women in, so most everything was a 'boys club.'

As for Health services for women, Men don't really need to go to special places to get medical care for procedures their insurance refuses to cover, (for example, terminating a pregnancy, or depending on your insurer, having access to birth control or vaccinations for HPV, just to name a few) Men don't really have anything like this because men don't have people fighting to take away their reproductive rights.

Regardless, I never said men didn't suffer, and don't suffer from sexism as well. At no point did I make that assertion. Sexism is something both Genders are subject to,and both genders participate in, both to their own gender, and to the other gender. I completely agree with you that more should be done for men in situations like those, though as to WHAT should be done, we would certainly have out differences. I would also argue that sexism plays into those institutions and orginizations like those, and the lack of their formation. The patriarchal society recgonizes that women need help, stereotypically men have always felt the need to protect their women (who once used to be property, and in some cases it's still the case)
'Women get the help because they need protection but all of us men are so strong and badass we don't need help!'

IN regards to incarcerated people being raped. It certainly an issue, one I would like to see adressed in a meaningful way. No one should be subjected to that, as they weren't sent to prison to be sexually assaulted, though some tacitly endorse it, hence the lack of reform.
I didn't count these among the rape stats i provided for a couple of reasons, the first being, I see it as an institutional problem. Since this is a demographic made up solely of men (this happens in womens prison too actually, to a smaller degree, but it applies in both sexes during inacarceration), in what is essentially a closed society with its own rules, laws, hierarchy etc. Counting it as part of the normal statistics would be misleading, as the people who are in these institutions live such a different life in there from what the average person has they need to be 'reintegrated' into society.


Regardless of how particular individuals feel, I'm glad the gaming community is finally starting to wisen up, albiet slowly.
Hopefully the threatened-by-women crowd gets weeded out.

This comment was edited on Dec 19, 2011, 16:30.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
56. Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 06:02 Draugr
 
Morga wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 05:29:

Well what privileges? When comparing all the stats, looking across the board, it isn't men who are privileged in society, but women.

Your statistics was far from comprehensive, or 'across the board' Those are cherry picked to support his argument. The list is far-far from comprehensive.

What handed to them? You think all men have sugar daddies who come save them when they're in trouble? Hell no, for example the far majority of homeless people in every country are men.

Just because one has privilege, doesn't mean they will retain said privilege all through their life,

Of course women are not the enemy, and men are not the enemy either! Misandric feminists such as the author who wrote that article on kotaku can be considered as such though.
Don't confuse feminism with women, in general, feminists don't really represent the interests of women, such as their lack of respect for housewives.

I find it slightly amusing that you think feminism requires animosity towards stay at home moms/housewives. In this case, The point of feminism is, just like males, women would have the ability to choose how they live their lives. Most people I know that would consider themselves feminists would not agree with you that feminists are people that hate housewives. If thats what they choose to do with their life than so be it, that was THEIR choice.
Also, to call this article misandric is just false. You might not like what it has to say, but at no point does it strike a tone that is disparaging towards the male gender.

If you're looking for a website that really does a good job truly tackling subjects like real misandry, misogyny, etc. I'd recommend, https://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/
Certainly not perfect, but what is. Of course, some might not like it because it doesn't pretend its us vs them.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
53. Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 04:09 Draugr
 
Morga wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 02:10:
This is a sad attempt by a Male feminist from Jezebel (they are under the same blog community banner with Kotaku. Notice how they link to each other) to put their hate filled propaganda into the gaming community.

Indeed, not only is the theory of “male privilege” dead wrong, if we were to use their arguments and definitions, we could say with statistical data that the opposite, or “female privilege,” would be a much more accurate conclusion. Truth is, feminist arguments hardly ever back up their claims of “male privilege” with anything more than superficial hyperbole or emotional tantrums. Sadly, all they can fall back on is the role of the oppressed victim in need of special treatment.

Yes, Priveledge can play out in several ways. You can be privileged in one area and not have privilege in another. These cherry-picked statistics aren't really indicative of privilege, and doesn't provide all the information, so it paints a skewed picture. for example, he could have included in his listing of stats that One in Four college women(25%) report surviving rape or attempted rape since their fourteenth birthday, compared to males at 3%, (on a side note did you know that women can be punished for being raped in some countries,) but then he wouldn't get a pretty post where everything listed is there solely to support his argument, providing an illusion of validity to his argument. The numbers don't tell the whole story, and all the numbers aren't even there.

Another example, they list unemployment rates in these stats, which shows women are more likely to be employed than men. What they left out of these statisics is that women are paid less for doing the same work men do. More women than men being employed is a result of the failing economy and stems from companies knowing they can get away with this, they are inclined to hire women instead of men or lay off male workers instead of women. If we looked at employment stats before the economy started taking a dump you would actually see that more men than women were employed then. They also leave out that men are more likely to be hired for higher-paying jobs. You'd be a fool to think that women don't have privilege as well, but you'd also be a fool to think that men also don't have privilege, and that in a patriarchal society, due to history, male privilege tends to be more readily apparent, and prevalent. Especially if you aren't part of the people who get to have that priviledge.
I think the wage gap is a great example of how male priveledge plays out. http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2003/10/07/the-wage-gap-series-so-far/

Of course, the article you quoted had a classic dismissal of feminism as calling them all emotional, Because we all know how women are, right?!

Also, I don't see what was hate filled propaganda about the article, No one is saying men are evil or anything like that, to deny that people have privilege (for example, males) and then talk about how their privilege influences something, I don't see as hateful at all. I mean, I guess you could see it as being hateful that he wants the gaming community to be more inclusive than we are as being threatening, but I certainly don't see it that way.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
17. Re: nerds are sexist Dec 18, 2011, 15:42 Draugr
 
space captain wrote on Dec 18, 2011, 15:08:
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Dec 18, 2011, 14:44:
I mean why pick on geeks, which was my exact point. A shit stain has more substance.

its got "substance", just not the kind we are looking for.. if you cant see that then the only thing you got is a shit stain as well

there is definitely a reason why this good dr. decided to "pick on geeks"... but who gives a fuck? let him rot in the grave he chose

I'd say he is 'picking on nerds' because he has a horse in the race, and it's an industry he appears to at least be loosely involved in. Addressing Sexism in a culture, I don't see as a bad thing,

For example, When Sexual harassment actually became a punishable offense in the work place, Sexism was/is still an issue outside of the workplace, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be addressed. I'm not saying some sort of punitive measure should be in place, (though sometimes that should be the case, getting banned from a server for being that guy who thinks everyone is a African american, Homosexual, Jewish, or female. It's something I certainly don't have a problem with.

Sexism may be an issue in other communities, but that doesn't mean we can't work on these issues in our own community.

I don't know if sports is a good example either, due to the inherent gender seperation and seperation there (for example, any gender can play any game, in the NFL only men get to play. Basketball has separate leagues for men and women.

Quboid brings up some good points too. A lot of the time this is supposedly being done to 'pander' to the target demographics. I would argue that generally they don't need to be pandered to in such a fashion and those people will still be around and that in doing so they would be get themselves more customers. Commenting on privilege was a good idea as well, a lot of people don't seem to understand how privilege can play into ones world view.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
612 Comments. 31 pages. Viewing page 16.
< Newer [ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo