Lol not very humble but I agree with you without a doubt.

Yeah, maybe I was a little blunt in my wording. Wasn't claiming I'm some grand master that's going to turn her from zero to hero. Just that I plan to pass on some the knowledge I have to her and hope it helps spring board her to developing her own game ideas.

So, i skipped most posts, and now I'm'a go on a rant. A ramble if you will.

The term "SJW" is hijacked. First off, the term "SJW" should be a good thing. So for the sake of this rant, consider SJW to be the good thing. A Social Justice Warrior is just that, a champion for social justice.

So on one hand we have the SJWs. They have the need to fight for social justice. Maybe they themselves are women, minorities etc. Maybe they're straight white males who AREN'T assholes and really do have a problem with the way things are. Either way, they're here.

On the other hand we have the bigots. They need no introduction.

Here's the thing. We live in the 21st century. It is not okay for things to stay the same. It is *not* okay for women to be treated like a minority. Women actually outnumber men in the world's population if I remember correctly - not by much - but they do outnumber. Men and women are equal. if you don't like that, fuck off.

We live in the 21st Century. And for the sake of this argument we're only talking about good ol 'Murica. Because in 'Murica, we have the constitution. And this constitution says "all men are created equal." That doesn't mean just the gender. It means the race of humankind. ALL are created equal. That means men, that means women. That means white, black, hispanic, asian, whatever. That means straight, that means gay. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.

So why is it a problem when people want that same equality in media representation? Who is it actually going to hurt if we have a black female protagonist in an action movie or in a video game? I personally found Jaqui Briggs to be awesome, and a breath of fresh air - because not only did she not fit into a negative stereotype, she was just a "normal person" in the context of the MK Universe. She wasn't having horns trumpeted about how she was a black woman. She just was there, carrying on the Briggs name. Same with Kung Jin. No horns trumpeting the fact that he's gay. he's just there, doing Kung Jin things, helping save Earthrealm.

So who does this hurt?

Nobody. But this is exactly the problem isn't it? It hurts nobody and yet a group of people act butthurt. Case in point, the whole "Zoe" thing with GamerGate. She made a game. DepressionQuest. And she got it reviewed. And it got a bad review. And people didn't understand it. (Side note: a lady friend of mine did play it, and as someone who experienced trauma growing up and having dealt with depression actually loved the game because *she* could relate to it. Reviews are not facts, they're fucking opinions.)

So because her exboyfriend claims she slept around, suddenly Zoe's a villain. Where's the fucking proof? That's why GamerGate is toxic, and that's why the current environment sucks. Because apparently Zoe "slept around" to get a shitty review for her game as said by her EX. Newsflash, exes tend to be assholes to their exes. That is rarely *not* the case. And yet people believed him because he has a dick, even though really, he was just a dick.

THAT is why "SJWs" exist. Because of shit like this. Because people don't like different things. Because people are bigoted. That isn't okay. Representation is not a bad thing. If you don't like it, suck it up buttercup.

Side Note: I don't bash anyone who is a "hardcore christian." I bash you if you are a "hardcore christian" who refuses to acknowledge that not everyone shares your beliefs. You can choose not to take part in something if you don't agree with it. But trying to make us "liberals" live by your morals is futile and idiotic. That's my problem with our current GOP in office.

~ ~ ~ ~

Now then. There is a third group. This third group is what I call, the PC crowd. These Politically Correct douchebags are the ones you people are calling SJWers. No. I'm an SJWer. I actually have a problem with the way people are treated.

It's the PC people who you should have a beef with. Yes, most PC people stand on the side of the SJWs, but those of us who like equality don't necessarily care for PC.

I'm glad for instance that MKX made the women more respectable looking. I also wouldn't mind - in the instance of say, a Kitana, Mileena, or characters who make sense - seeing alternate skimpier attires, because to me, they are sexy. Objectifying? Yes. I like *options* that aren't default options. I also know women who like to dress similar ways, because they feel sexy in it or because they just like how it feels. These same female friends *do* have a problem with how women are portrayed because that's all they're portrayed as in media.

The PC crowd doesn't want the option for anyone. The PC crowd is obsessed with not offending anyone, and in doing so end up offending everyone. I get offended by the PC crowd.

I might be an "SJW" but I have no problem with jokes that make fun of religion, race, creed, etc. If you can't laugh at yourself, you can't laugh at anything.

The PC crowd can't stand any joke that offends anyone. That's why they're fucking PC.

When an "SJW" says they don't want women to be objectified, when they say they want equal representation, we're not saying "ditch all sexy females" or "get rid of white male heroes." We're not saying "throw out everything about the old guard." We're just saying "we need more variety."

I'm okay with a woman wearing a skimpy outfit. But not as the only option.

I'm okay with games in which the white male straight dude is the big damn hero. I can relate since I am white, I am male, and I am straight as a board. But I also like games in which the main character is female, or colored. And I want those options. It's why the Elder Scrolls is awesome, you can be whatever the fuck you want.

So please, stop confusing "SJW" with "PC." They're not the same. One just wants equality and representation. The other is just a bunch of thin skinned dickheads who are the extreme opposite of the bigots.

P.S. to bigots out there: fuck off. I work at Walmart, I deal with your species too much to want to deal with you on a game forum.

I had intended on reading all three pages of this thread and try to give the most level headed answer I could. Then I saw this post and realized you're just wondering why people are annoyed by you.

To MrEsturk and Bryden88

Bravo. You've both summed up many of my thoughts. Your posts were breath of fresh air. What you said about the sanitized red carpet, MrEsturk, raises an interesting point: the PC crowd ironically treat women as delicate creatures, just like misogynists do.

About PC pricks offending everyone by trying not to offend anyone, Bryden88, there is a possible example other than the aforementioned one that comes to mind: Thunder, in the new Killer Instinct game.

His design in the first game was deemed too offensive and stereotypical to be included as a retro alt. Yet his primary design is just as stereotypical, maybe even more so.

Personally, I've come to the conclusion stereotypes aren't necessarily offensive. Obviously, we should get more female/minority characters who aren't stereotypical, but as long as the streotype isn't offensive, it's not that big a deal.

What is an offensive stereotype? Anything that ridicules the stereotyped character. It's not the way the character talks, or is dressed, it's how they're treated. Thunder in the first KI game wasn't treated like a big stupid joke. But the PC police acts like his original design alone reduced him to one.

Another example is, again, the sexualized gals. The degradation comes from them being loved ONLY for their appearances, not merely from them wearing skimpy clothes. PC pricks who act like those outfits are degrading, to me, are unintentionally agreeing with misogynist bigots that girls who wear them are rape-bait. At least, that's how I feel, when I see people who supposedly care for women's rights refer to one as a slut or a hoe.

In short, the PC crowd seems to act like the burqua is empowering for women, and that they should wear it so men can respect them by not getting hard-ons, which we all know, is the exact same thing as raping them (sarcasm).

You`re just arguing for the sake of arguing.
If you think there is nothing wrong, you are part of the problem.

I may seem chaotic arguing for, and against issues on all sides.
There are also many issues to begin with.

I`ve always warned the blind sheep to question their shepherds.
There are snakes in every garden.
The Truth is the Truth, always seek the Truth!

Be it Police brutality, Government tyranny & oppression or Cults masquerading as religion.
The Age of Accountability is well under way. You can`t stop it.
Weeding out corruption is the ultimate patriotism!

I don`t know about these "SJW"s you`re complaining about,
but I have had an influence on the World. You`re either new here or haven`t been paying attention. I`m far from anonymous.

Here in Canada, what I said about the Boston Marathon bombing,
about running towards the danger, has been coopted for First Responders,
since the Funeral for the 3 RCMP murdered in Moncton last year.

Though on the nagative side, it bothers me ISIS has twisted my words, and acted upon Christian minorities, and "false idols".
How can I usher in the Age of Accountability, without being accountable for my own actions?


Maybe Prostitutes should Unionize so they can fight for their rights. Then Pimps can be held accountable for faulty buiseness practices, Employee treatment, quality merchandise, and Workplace Health Safety violations.



Ka-Tra

Your way of writing almost makes me sick to read. Honestly not trying to be offensive, but why can't you be straight forward?

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I am arguing because it is really sickening and annoying to hear people complain about equality when, especially here in Canada, it is becoming less and less of a problem. No, I didn't just say there is no problem. Sure not everyone is treated the same, but like I said in my earlier posts, that will never be a reality because WE ARE DIFFERENT.

Yes definitely chaotic to say the least... I would use unorganized and unsupported, but chaotic works too.

Blind sheep? Snakes in Garden? The Truth is the Truth? Really hard to not take this is some religious nonsense. I agree with the last part about "seek the truth". Unfortunately for religious people, a 2000 year old book is no place to find "the truth". I think you ought to take the "always seek the truth" part much more seriously that the other sentences in that paragraph. I dunno about your cult/religion, but to tackle those metaphors I would say Blind sheep don't have the capacity to question their shepherd... What are they gonna do, run away? Just kidding. How about you don't put your faith in a shepherd and lead your own way? How about you check that garden for snakes before you enter it? Your metaphors seem very full of religious dogma.

LOL cults masquerading as religion!! That is an awesome one! Please tell me the difference between a cult and religion.... Cause here is the way I see it

Religion: an old cult
Cult: a new religious movement

Opression, government tyranny, and police BRUTALITY! ( Stryker? lol, come on, its an MK site ) are obviously things any sane person doesn't think should happen. But wait.... ohhhh it's coming.... we have laws against that! This is where you have to have a SPECIFIC goal to achieve. There will always be outliers that are racist and hate everyone that isn't themselves for any reason they can think of. But to rally for these things when we already have laws in place to stop this kind of thing... wtf do you want? This stuff isn't going to just disappear with the passing of a law, much like slavery didn't. It takes time to change the overall attitude, complaining constantly doesn't necessarily help anyone, especially yourself.

Your links were ridiculous. One a link to a google search of "NB mounty funeral"... WTF is that supposed to prove? The other one a link to a thread here that mentions a short little message you said..

Yeah, I'm sure somebody on the Canadian health board saw your message and "coopted" it into the First Responder manual... How about you show me some proof of it being you that made this happen, instead of a google search and a thread here on MKO. That would probably hold a little more ground instead of what you've said.

ISIS twisted your words, eh? Because of you they have attacked christian minorities...? Those whole last two paragraphs... Wow Tetra, your nonsense baffles me.

I am all for the "age of accountability". Accountability is where its at. "How can I usher in the age of accountability without being accountable for my own actions?" WTF. Either that was unfunny sarcasm or just stupid.

Why the sudden switch to prostitutes and pimps? Don't you agree they should either be illegal or regulated?


Your still anonymous to a lot of people and you haven't said or shown me anything to make me think your worthy of not being anonymous. Seems like a bit of a "god complex" going on there Tetra.... "I have had an influence on the world" " I am not anonymous" And then talking about all of the great things "you" did, which, by your wording, makes you better than someone who is anonymous. In short, you seem to be arguing the point that you are important to the world... for no apparent reason.... and all the while not making a great case

Again, I stress I am not trying to offend you, Tetra. But the points you make are convoluted and not very well supported. I am not arguing for the sake of arguing, I am arguing because I hate this "Everything is unfair, The world is corrupt and its our job to weed out the corruption" mind set.

newt27, mother of god, Tetra-Vega is trolling. He's trolling. Please tell me you're just playing along in a really committed, realistic way or something.

This is just sad. What is wrong with you people?

"I don`t want to hear it"
"stop it already"
"they`ve already won"

Nobody has won anything. This isn`t a game.
Regardless whether I`ve actually done anything,
your negativity is doing even far less to help the situation.
You are painting yourselves into a corner.

This is exactly why I think people = shit...



Ka-Tra

I find it very revealing that the people who are quickest to consider themselves the socially just good guys also happen to be the quickest to label other people bigots, misogynists, assholes, etc. and take it upon themselves to decide what qualifies as "social justice" in the first place.

How does it go again? "Who watches the Watchmen"?

I tend to find it's very easy to label when the proof is in the pudding.

"GET THE GAYS OUT OF MORTAL KOMBAT" ... bigot.

"WTF WHY CAN'T I HAVE BIG BOOBS STUPID SJWS WOMENZ DON'T PLAY MK" - sexist, bigot

"TANYA IS HOTTER WHITE" - bigot

"JAQUI BRIGGS IS UNATTRACTIVE, SHE HAS DARK SKIN" - bigot

All obvious things, and things I happen to have seen on these god damned forums. So yes, I will call those things bigotry.

And yes.

"OMG YOUR JOKE OFFENDED ME CALL THE POLICE" - thin skinned PC douchebag.

Progress.

Thank you. I swear this used to be a friendlier kommunity...



Ka-Tra

@TonytheTiger

Alright then, by what "respectful" names should we refer to people who obviously have a problem with either gender, and/or any ethnicity, and/or different sexual orientations?

It seems like you don't like people who are right about something to be unapologetic about it. Like we should just be nice to bigots (oops, sorry for using that offensive word again) when we disagree with them. Basically, act like democrats do towards republicans.

I mean, are we supposed to be tolerant of the intolerant? That's an argument conservatives love to use, as if it makes progressives look hypocritical. Only it doesn't. Tolerating the intolerant just to avoid appearing intolerant yourself is like showing your support for sharks' rights by letting them eat you, or bees' rights by letting them sting you to death. It doesn't work that way.

This reminds me of Rihanna protesting against Indiana's religious freedom bill vulgarly, and how some people seemed to be more offended by her crass vocabulary than what she was justifiably protesting against.

The only thing wrong with the RFRA is that it doesn't encompass non-believers as well. The right to refuse service(for any reason) should be a right for all people to have. Maybe Rihanna should have blasted the gays that caused this law to happen instead of the lawmakers who came up with it as a knee jerk reaction. If gays would stop suing Christians for upholding their beliefs then this law wouldn't have been made. It's not like Christian business owners are firing people for being gay or refusing service to gay patrons. They do however refuse service when the gays ask them to cater a gay wedding or make a gay wedding cake. But instead of the gays taking their business elsewhere or writing a negative review they get the justice system involved and attempt to bankrupt people for their beliefs. Then people want to use the argument that even Jesus treated prostitutes and thieves as equals and that is very true. I'm sure he treated gays with respect as well. However Jesus didn't pay for sex, or drive the getaway camel. I sure as hell doubt he'd bake a cake with two grooms holding hands on it.

Let`s see, non Biblical example...

While every Ass spews Shit,
it`s your choice wether to weaponize it,
or fertilize a bountiful harvest.
Which is more productive?

Morpheus appears before you,
holding a Heart Pill, and a Bullet.
He explains that Gunpowder(Nitroglycerine)
was invented by the ancient Chinese,
as Medicine still perscribed to this day.
One pill to take your Life, the other to Save it.
Which will you choose?

Nitrous Oxide can be a soothing anesthetic.
It can also send your car into an uncontrollable
crash, horribly mangling you. Now who`s laughing?



Ka-Tra

A cake cannot be gay, you do realize this right? A cake is a fucking piece of food.

Obviously I'm not expecting to change Tetra's mind, but I have someone in my class that says the same kind of stuff all the time, so it's definitely possible Tetra believes that they are saying. Reminds me of Anna Sarkeesian lol.

Anyways, It is pretty funny how you have to rack your brain to come up with non-biblical examples, then you just quote other poems or books or whatever those were. They certainly weren't actual scientific studies.

I don't know if your comment was directed at me Tetra, but I am not trying to offend you as a person. I am allowed to criticize and ridicule your ideas, that's the whole premise of free speech, and the mechanism society uses to weed out the ridiculous ideas. But you, as a person, Tetra, I respect. Your ideas, these ones you have put forth, I certainly don't respect and I am not obligated to.



Let's see if you can handle making this simple.

What is your goal and how will you know when you have reached that goal?
Realistically, when will your mind be changed?

Because that is one thing every major religion seems to support. Argument by authority don't count for shit here, and I am more than willing to change my mind. I find it hard to believe you have the same mentality, most religious people do not change their minds very often. Give me some EV-I-DENCE that there is a major problem and something can be done about it on the social level.

You have to prove that. You have to prove that they actually do have a problem with gender/ethnicity/etc. See, this is what I mean by taking the easy road. You can't just say something is bigotry and then magically that person becomes a villain. Regardless of how much righteous indignation you throw at something, you still have responsibilities to prove your claim.

For example:



What? Why?? That's textbook begging the question. The entire thread is about debating over whether SJWs are good but here you are asking everyone to just take your word for it.



This says literally nothing because not only have you not proven that SJWs themselves are good, you haven't proven why their brand of "social justice" is itself good. But it's easy to just be like "hey, they claim to be the good guys so obviously they must be!" It doesn't work that way. When a politician stands up and says they're going to do something terrible but frames it like it's for some greater good, a lot of people see through that charade.

That transparency exists all over the SJWs, too. They love to talk about Truth, Justice, and the American way but they really mean My truth, My justice, My way. And you know how it's easy to tell? Because whenever somebody fights them on it they're super fast to start labeling their opponents as all these terrible things. "Oh, you don't agree with me? Well you must not like social justice! You must be racist/sexist/homophobic/etc.!"

I'm going to ask a few questions.

Do you believe men and women are equal?

Do you believe that a white man and a black man are inherently equal?

Do you believe that all men are equal regardless of sexual orientation?

If the answer is no to any of these... then congratulations, you ARE a bigot.

And if you're American, then shame on you. The Constitution says all men are created equal. All men as in the race of man. ALL people are created equal. Period. If you disagree with that you've got issues.

I don't get the whole cake thing. Is making a wedding cake for a gay couple really going to doom the maker of said cake to hell? I seriously doubt that's the case. What happened to god making everyone in his image and that we are ALL his children?

Where in the bible does it say that if you make a cake for a homosexual couple that you will burn in hell, or that its even a sin? Can someone show me that part?

The closest thing I have ever heard is that is says marriage is between a man and a woman, and that does not imply that homosexuals are to be treated less than human, or that a Christian will burn in hell for attending a gay wedding or making a measly cake for one lol

What exactly constitutes homosexual acts, when plenty of women take it up the ass or down their throat?

Jehovah looks down on phallic worship in general.



Ka-Tra

You don't get it and I wont try to argue over cake Sexuality. The point is that I should not be forced to attend a wedding I view as sinful or bake a cake for what I view as a sinful event if I don't want to. I should be able to refuse service for any reason I see fit regardless of religious beliefs. When Liberals and SJWs get together and try to destroy Indiana for making this law they are destroying our freedom. The freedom to serve who you want to serve. They attempt to destroy our ability to not have to pay a fine or go to prison because I said no to making you a cake or catering your fucking wedding and if the SJWs get their way they will force people into the servitude of others or else they face penalties brought about by the government.

If I want to refuse your service because you're gay that's my right. If I want to refuse your service because you're black that's my right. If I want to refuse your service because you're a Christian that's my right. Stop with the PC bullshit that's killing our Freedom. Let the free market and capitalism decide how these businesses will profit.

This guy fucking gets it.

Colt4Prez.

Bait and switch.





See? You aren't going to pull that trick. The motte and bailey argument as described in m0s3pH's post on the last page.

You don't get to bring up all these nuanced issues like video game protagonists and Zoe Quinn and then when challenged retreat to platitudes like "but don't you think men and women are equal?!" That's dishonest and you know it. And that's exactly why SJWs are no heroes. They're not really looking for honest debate. Anybody who challenges their worldview is suddenly one of the bad guys, one of the bigots or misogynists.

It might not seem like it in the context of a video game message board but out there in reality, where there are issues of real consequence, this line of thinking is fucking dangerous. It's how dictators take over. What, you think they stand on stage and twirl their mustaches as they give speeches of world domination? No, they talk about "morals" and "values." And they convince people that anyone who opposes them must be evil since who would oppose morals and values, right? Then from there it's easy to justify all kinds of horrible injustices because once we convince ourselves that someone is the bad guy we don't have to worry about their rights anymore. If they get hurt who cares? Due process? What's that? This is scary shit right here.



Since when have people gone out of their way to prevent variety? First of all, I seriously question your premise that people are being alienated by their games. Millions of people of all ages and all genders and all races play video games. So, yeah, you're going to have to prove that there is some group of people that is being left in the cold before you can offer it as an incontrovertible fact.

Second, even if there were such a group of people that weren't actively being marketed to, you ever think that maybe the reason that is the case is because members of that group simply don't buy games in equal numbers to other groups? Occam's razor. You don't just wave a magic wand and a video game appears. It takes a huge investment and if you put all these progressive things in to appeal to a certain group and that group doesn't bite then where are you?

Not to mention, there are no special barriers to entry based on gender or race. If a group of women want to get together to make a video game for other women then they can do as they damn well please. At some point, the definition of "equality" is telling someone "fine, go do what you want." That's what black people did in times past. They didn't say "hey, white people, make music that speaks to us." They made their own shit. And this was during times of open violent oppression. People couldn't even use the same bathrooms at the time they were doing all these things. That is how groups are supposed to get things done. Not by asking for it, by doing it.

What SJWs keep doing, however, is telling established developers to just make something happen. "Hey, we want games that appeal to X, Y, Z. Do it." That's not "equality." That's entitlement. And when you couple that with accusations of racism or sexism, that's straight up strong arming. It's manipulative, dishonest, and just plain fucking lazy. Nobody is stopping any group of women from making their own video games that appeal to their own tastes. Equality comes with responsibility.

Edited: I had a wall of text, but I'll rewrite it with better thoughts.

Here's where I think you aren't getting it.

You say I'm being dishonest and "that's the problem with SJWs." Except, I'd argue, you pull some of the same tactics, assuming you in fact support that conservative side of things.

You say that if women want games catered to them, they should do it. So why is it that when a woman like Zoe makes a game "she must have sucked dicks to do so" and "she fucked a guy to get him to review the game." Not only were these things false, people automatically sided with her ex. That's how GamerGate got started.

You say you have no problem with diversity.

So why is it that when Netherrealm openly CHOOSES to make their women not look trashy, to make Sonya wear clothes, to make one of the main new characters gay, another one a black woman, why is it that these things are suddenly so wrong to do, and suddenly serving the SJW crowd?

You can't have it both ways.

You can't say "I have no problem with gay people," "I like women," and "I'm not a racist," and then piss about MK having these things.

That's what I'm seeing from this community. You can bash us "SJW types" but you have ZERO problem being hypocritical. If a woman makes a game, she must have sucked a guy off for it. If a well known dev chooses to do something different than what the "straight white male" crowd wants, they MUST be catering to those dirty liberals.

Which is it? I'd love an answer..