To be fair, pointy stairs are dangerous...

Human Dignity is NOT a Political Agenda
People shouldn`t get attacked for pointing out that there are injustices.



Ka-Tra

Keep telling yourself that.



Sure I can, because you haven't proven the contrary.



... and? Being offended doesn't give you the right to anything, so stop acting so entitled. You're making it sound like it's worse when 4chan does it, another hallmark of the SJW. It's not bullying if the right people do it to the wrong people in your eyes. I suggest you look up the story of the tumblr user communismkills, who was doxxed because people found her satirical comics offensive.



For the record, I think that Kung Jin was handled very nicely by NRS. The only people I have a problem with are those who can't just be happy that there is now a gay character in MK. All they're screaming is NOT GAY ENOUGH. Give an inch, they want a mile. SJWism at its finest.

I think it's funny that you're throwing around the word 'bigotry' when you're displaying the characteristics of a bigot yourself. The definition of bigotry is "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own." You've already stated that those who don't agree with you must be racist, sexist, or whatever, so I'll let you do the math on this one. SJWs are just as bad as the racists and sexists you learned about in school. The only difference is the team they play for.



The entire realm of comedy would like a word with this part of your post, but then again people are too easily offended anyway. One thing I will say is that being a thug is not a matter of opinion. It's a clearly defined term, just like racism, and calling someone a thug, if that is indeed true, is not racist. Being a thug is not limited to black people, just like racism is not limited to white people, as much as you guys try to make society believe it.

Not sure what I did to offend you, but you're an asshole.

You don't know me. So fuck off on calling me a bigot just because I dislike actual racists/sexists/etc. Not once did I say someone who disagrees with me is one of those things. Saying someone is ugly because she's black ISN'T subjective, that IS racist. Not sure how the fuck anything like that is up for debate. Not once did I say "oh you must be X if you don't agree with me." Nice try. At least Tony is civil, unlike you're insulting idiocy.

I'm *not* the guy who demands THIS and ONLY THIS. I'm just the guy saying stop whining when they add diversity, and if you don't like it, don't play. That's always been my problem with the crowd I call anti-SJW. They hate diversity and want only their interests catered to.

I like diversity. You want to play a game I don't like or agree with, go for it. But just because a series you might like for instance decides to add something you don't like... well.. don't play that character. So someone doesn't like Sonya having clothes. Tough shit. They openly said they're openly making it more grounded that way, they're not "catering to PC interests." If they were, Mileena and Kitana would have the same treatment.

It's funny, in your "anti-SJW'ing" you're doing exactly what you claimed I'm doing. You're being the asshole to someone else. How about take a god damned chill pill.

No wonder people are sending recruitment ads to other MK sites via PMs.

Yet from your first post...



Men and women aren't equal there are many differences. It doesn't make me sexist to think that men and women are different. They clearly are. Yet here you show intolerance of people who disagree with you. That perfectly fits the definition of bigot that was given to you by m0s3ph




Also from your first post. You are making up your own definitions and seem to still be using them.



Your generalizing. I hate SJW's but I do like diversity.



Are you inferring Kitana and Mileena are not toned down from last game as well?



Like m0s3ph said being offended does not entitle you to anything. You seem to be the one that is all riled up.

Maybe you have never actually dealt with the SJW's the rest of the world refers to.

The reason people don't like them is because they don't do anything about the issue they claim they have. Instead they just bitch about shit they think is wrong. And as someone else stated, they appeal to emotion as opposed to logic.

They don't do anything except for complain about stuff (like video games) that are apparently sexist, racist, etc. A prime example of this is Anna Sarkeesian. She even manufactures evidence, I.E. using a game like Hitman, where there is only one mission at a strip club, and only 2/7 parts of that one mission have the strippers in it. She claims that this game encourages the player to objectify the women, while simultaneously getting sexual pleasure. It's just not true. 75% of players walked right past the women when they played the mission, and even less killed them. The game certainly doesn't encourage it, as you are penalized for being seen or killing these women. These are the kind of people we have a problem with.

Tony's quote sums this up the best. Something like " Activists would get a ramp installed, whereas SJW's would try to have the stairs removed because they are offensive"

Ad hominem. Also, I should remind you that the truth hurts.



And you don't know me. Remember, you threw the first stone when you said that anti-SJWs are just as bad as the special snowflakes.



As opposed to the fake racists/sexists/etc. You know, the ones who are minorities and women. Those are totally fine. Also, I called you a bigot because you are a bigot. See below.



But you have undeservedly painted SJWs with such a positive brush that I can only assume that you're one of them, and you did say that you were like an SJW. Remember?



Yes. I know why. Because you people are so intellectually dishonest on a pathological level that you can't even keep your own arguments straight.



>this much backpedaling

Nobody is arguing whether or not calling someone ugly on the basis of their skin tone is racist. We're pretty much all in agreement that it is. Please make the straw men less obvious next time.

Oh, and *your, unless you mean that I am insulting idiocy, which in this case is entirely correct. You've given me lots of material to work with.



This isn't even close to being true, in reality it's just the opposite.

You may not be the guy who demands it one way or the highway, but you are the guy who generalized the majority of a large group of people as being intolerant bigots. Seeing as how you're an SJW, and these people do not agree with you, and you are labeling these people pejoratively without any knowledge of their true character, you are a bigot. Or did you forget what you said?



You see, you've actually made it very easy for me to logically connect the dots here. It's like all you do is pull excuses out of your ass to seem like you have the moral high ground... and I'm the asshole?



Even when you win, you sound bitter. You got what you want, so fuck everyone else, right? I laughed when I heard one of the developers say that some of the alternate costumes for the women were revealing, and there's maybe two in the whole game that are, but to a far lesser degree than the last game.



Nice try, but no, because Mileena and Kitana are so modest in MKX that this is the least amount of skin they're showing since MK2. If they truly were shooting for an agenda-free adjustment, many of the men would also have very toned down physiques, and that simply isn't the case. Besides, MK's aesthetics have been campy, cliche, and edgy the entire time, I doubt they would change the formula for the sake of changing it. So basically, I don't buy that there wasn't an agenda involved, and I've read the developer interviews. It smells fishy.



Prove that I'm being intellectually dishonest, straw manning, baiting and switching, and unfairly labeling people. All I've done is call out your bullshit and you've pulled out the torch and started flaming.



Oh man, serious business. Recruitment ads have never been necessary to pull people away from here.

In fairness, this has been happening since at least 2005. Mick and Co. will likely weather the storm.

See, this is where you're just being a dick.

When I "painted SJW" with a positive brush, I never actually let's see, saw the meaning of the term as defined by that "know your meme site." I've pretty much only been exposed to that term based on "oh you like diversity, you're an SJW" that people like to throw around. Based on MY experience, I'd fit right in. Based on the "other" definition, I wouldn't.

You guys are so biased and full of hate for SJWs that you appear to be insulting me and labeling *me* even though we're mostly in agreement on shit, that's the part that's pissing me off.

Not once have I said that if you liked Sonya naked, you're a horrible person for example. All I said is tough shit. And I say it like, I sound "bitter" like that in response to all the eggheads who are attacking NRS for daring to put clothes on one of their more "realistic" (and I use this term loosely) characters. Kitana and Mileena may be more "covered" but they're still wearing impractical outfits for fighting, and outfits people consider sexy. I'm not judging anyone for liking them.

Saying that women and men are equal, fuck off if you disagree is a comment I stand by. I'm not talking physical differences. Everyone knows that a man is naturally built one way, women another. I'm talking about socially etc. Anyone who thinks for instance, a woman shouldn't be paid as much as a man IS a sexist, and you can't convince me otherwise. People who treat women as automatically weaker without knowing them? Sexist. People who quite frankly, don't treat a woman as a person, and more of an object for sexual gratification? Sexist. I don't see how ANYONE could argue against that without painting themselves as such.

I maintain a simple stance, regardless of labels.

Diversity is good. Whining about it is stupid. Racists/Sexists/Bigots don't deserve being catered to because they don't deserve to even be in society. I AM intolerant of intolerant people. That isn't bigotry, that's having conviction. I'm not some keyboard warrior that only says the shit and then turns around and does nothing. If I overhear someone using racial slurs at work, I'll damn well call them on it. if I witness some deadbeat asshole treating his wife like shit because "she's a woman and she'll do as her man says" then I'll definitely step in because that's what good people do.

Not tolerating those things is not the same thing as judging everyone. But when someone comes out and MAKES a sexist comment, or MAKES a racist comment or MAKES a bigoted 'anti-gay' comment what the hell am I to think? "Oh he's just being an asshole today?" Well shit, if you feel like being that today, what's to stop you from being one tomorrow? How about people just not be dicks.

((and before anyone goes into "well maybe it's their religion..." fuck religion. Religion isn't an excuse for being an asshole to any group in America. And since most of the time, the religion in question is Christianity, those people are actually violating the whole "treat others as you want to be treated" thing that was supposedly spoken of.))

What I want to know is how SJWs are making the world a better place when their modus operandi appears to be blindsiding random people with burdens the SJWs themselves are unwilling to shoulder. Generally speaking, SJWs seems awfully interested in telling other people what to do rather than doing it themselves. "Make a game that has these features!" "Write your characters this way!" "Put them in these clothes!" All things that require time, effort, and money and, like any business venture, comes with a certain amount of risk. But it always seems like the people making these demands are unwilling to put their own asses on the line. They either insist other people do it for them or make a Kickstarter and ask other people to eat the cost.

Demand or ask?

I've been on plenty of game forums where people "ask" for more diversity. Asking isn't a bad thing. Asking for diversity is a good thing because quite frankly, it includes more people than it excludes, unless you hate the notion of it being diverse.

I see this the most with Bioware. They make a game. People ask for things. People ask for things in every game. And yes, there are people who 'demand' things even though you don't really get to make demands. I saw that with Mass Effect 3 and the idiots who felt like 5 minutes at the end of the game ruined the whole trilogy. People are disgusting.

Here's my question though. What's the difference between an "SJW" who wants what they want, and say, the fans who demand Tremor be in the game, or demand that Tanya is in the game etc? I think there's a very huge difference to begin with anyway with what you're talking about. A person who asks for more diversity is not an SJW. Saying "hey, Tanya's new look kinda sucks because she was white washed" wasn't being an SJW, it was pointing out that they initially did white wash her. She's always been dark skinned. I don't look at twitter or not but most people I've seen weren't making demands, they were stating their opinions that her appearance was initially weak and wrong for her character.

I don't remember anyone 'demanding.' Unless you mean the people who go "DO THIS OR YOU LOSE MY SERVICE." Because those were the kinds of people I saw with Mass Effect. Those are the people I see with Bioware with Dragon Age Inquisition.

I see demands from everyone, not just the people you describe as "SJWs." I've seen it from people who I'd typical classify as sexist or perhaps just immature asshats. People demanding Bioware add a sex scene for one of the love interests, or saying that the same love interest is ugly because she's not white. People 'demanding' Bioware add more love interests because 'all the women are ugly and thus cater to only women players and gay people.'

The "let's play I DEMAND" crowd is everywhere, and isn't just SJWs, let's not kid ourselves.

You know, with all the people complaining about SJWs being intolerant, and essentially discriminating against bigots, I've come to the following conclusion:

They want a more politically correct term for bigots. Lol.

Okay then, the PC term for blind people is "visually impaired", so I'd refer to bigots as "intellectually shielded".

Unlike mentally-challenged people, whose cerebral shortcomings can be excused on genetics or serious brain damage, the intellectually shielded's brains aren't unusual in anyway. They just have a strong aversion to intellectualism and critical thinking, that's all. They're too lazy and weak-willed to think for themselves.

There. Do I seem more tolerant if I use the term "intellectually shielded" instead of of the B-word? Yep, I can see that, the B-word being as bad as the F or N words. Lol.

I realize "intellectually-shielded" is rather long, so a shorter term for bigots (OOPS, sorry) could always be baka, instead. What does it mean? Exactly, not knowing what it means means people won't use it insultingly.

Ain't I such a progressive, coming up with a PC term even for bigots? OOPS, again, sorry, I meant baka.

Homophobes. Mysogynists. Racists. The HMR crowd. Who suffers the same hardship as the LGBT community, as some courageous people in this thread managed to bring to light. Guess the HMR crowd has it's own SJWs helping them. Lol.

Oh no! I didn't think of more politically correct terms for the HMR. I'm so, so, so, so sorry. Not.

Demand. They are called social justice WARRIORS. They are the ones who play the sexist/racist/ whatever card because of things like Tanya being whitewashed, or objectification of women.

No one has a problem with people who politely send a message to a dev requesting they include an Australian, or more black people, or whatever. People are allowed to make requests, obviously.



Well they are both extremely annoying, there are quite a few similarities, I like this comparison.

The best one is that they are both just asking for what they want.

The big difference is that the SJW's disguise it as being what is moral and right. The Tremor and Tanya people normally know they just really like the character.



You never compared SJW to Tremor and Tanya fans even though you set it up as if you were going to. Then you go from talking about diversity, to how Tanya was "whitewashed", to how her appearance was weak and "wrong" (totally subjective). As if Tanya being dark skinned alone makes her appear stronger, and as if people were complaining about her design BECAUSE she was white. That is the problem.

Some people had a problem with the design? That fine, no one has a problem with that. Some people had a problem with the design simply because she had white skin? That is pointing to an SJW in my eyes.



Oh yeah, your personal experience trumps everyone else's, I forgot.



Yeah, and? As I have already pointed out, no it isn't just SJW's that demand things. But they are the only one that demand/complain about things because they are sexist/racist/ etc. This is ridiculous to do in things such as video games. Not to mention they normally do it based on their own experiences, and how the content made them or others feel. Not the actual evidence and logic at hand.

I'm glad you put "ask" in quotes. A mere request does not come with consequences for failure. SJWs, on the other hand, have a curious way of expressing their desires. They don't just ask for stuff. They run an inquisition. And usually at times their target is not prepared to respond to something so nuanced.



It is when the request comes with a bunch of extra baggage the person being asked is now expected to shoulder. Video game designers are not social scientists. Answering for issues of race and gender is not part of the job description. Asking them for more black characters is one thing but it rarely manifests like that. It's usually framed as a question regarding the state of gaming. For example, asking a game designer during an interview why there are so few strong female protagonists or why all the girls in a certain game have big boobs. It's the "do you promise to stop beating your wife?" trick. When the request comes with the implication that failing to deliver means you are a bad person or "part of the problem" then that isn't actually a request. At best it's manipulative and disingenuous. At worst it's a threat. And sometimes those threats come to fruition when you see people lose their jobs or made to publicly apologize for bullshit reasons. Chris Evans and Jeremy Renner were forced to apologize for making a stupid joke about Black Widow, a fictional character. Like somehow their off-hand comment justifies public shaming. They have to have the spotlight shone on them so SJWs can nod their head in smug satisfaction for a job well done.

Again, it's the Matt Taylor fiasco. He's a scientist. His job was to land a rocket on an asteroid. But suddenly he was expected to answer for every facet of gender relations. And if you think I'm exaggerating just read the headline of this article:
http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/13/7213819/your-bowling-shirt-is-holding-back-progress
"That's one small step for man, three steps back for humankind"

Holy. Shit. This one dude evidently set humankind back. Humankind. Over a shirt! What kind of bullshit is this? How far up their own ass does someone have to be where they can rake someone over the coals for the flimsiest of reasons yet be so convinced they're the good guy in the situation? That's what an SJW is. Someone just asking for certain things? Hey, sure, ask away. But just asking doesn't make someone an SJW. Being a morally myopic piece of garbage does.



No. Please stop misconstruing the arguments. This isn't about SJWs discriminating against bigots. It's about whether or not those people are bigots in the first place. And even if they are, what makes mob justice a suitable solution? This is about SJWs behaving like judge, jury, and executioner. I'm curious how many SJWs would openly apologize when they inevitably ruin someone who was actually innocent.



Bingo. People ask for things all the time. People want their entertainment to fit their interests. But SJWs have a real knack for warping this into a moral battle.

Perhaps they wouldn't make it into a moral battle if they weren't provoked.

In my past arguments I've been all over the place. That's what happens when I don't stop and seriously think about how to frame it. So I'll just have one issue.

The "Zoe issue". She makes a game to cater to HER interests. Depression Quest. So she makes a game for her audience. People start to give it attention. A group of people however, don't like it. They claim it didn't deserve the attention it was giving.

So right there that's problem 1.

Next comes the nonsensical ramblefest from her ex. Accusing her of getting a favorable review from a Kotaku journalist. Except while they had a relationship, he NEVER REVIEWED THE GAME.

Problem 2.

Here's problem 3. Death threats. Doxxing. All sorts of mean spiriting vitriol aimed at her.

All of this is because she is a woman and made a game that wasn't catering to the interests of the "typical" gamer audience, and people "naturally" believed an OBSESSED ex-boyfriend.

Sexist. Bullying. Ever since that and GamerGate erupted, I've seen the term SJW used - initially by pro-GamerGate supporters who think the whole thing started because of ethics when really it wasn't. It was a bunch of boys getting their tighty whities in a bunch over a game they didn't understand.

Why do I rehash the Zoe thing? Because you can't tell me that shit's okay, and then hate on SJWs at the same time. Harassment is harassment. Two wrongs don't make a right.

But you shouldn't be needling and provoking. Don't poke the bear. That's the very issue that happened. The "SJW explosion" as it were is because of shit like this.

If you want people to make games in their own interests, you can't turn around and shit all over it when they do. The people wanting diversity shouldn't be "fucked if you do, fucked if you don't."

Are they not supposed to be the good guys? Doesn't being the bigger person come with the territory? They can't have it both ways. SJWs can't consider themselves as having the moral authority to go on the offensive against perceived evil doers but then claim "they started it!" after having sunk to the same level.

SJWs pride themselves on their strong moral fiber but that comes with its own brand of responsibilities. The minute you put yourself out there as being better than other people, you damn well better make sure you actually are. Otherwise you come across as not just morally equal to other people but straight up morally deficient.


Wait, why is that problem 1? Ok, so people claimed it didn't deserve the attention. So what?


Again, you can't just state facts and expect them to speak for themselves. Ok, so her ex said some shit about her. And? That's problem 2 because...?


Wait, so people on the Internet can be mean? Color me shocked. Again, what does this have to do with SJWs? If someone gets a death threat then they either A) ignore it, or B) respond to it. If they think it's actually a credible threat then they can and should call the police.


Prove it.


Again, prove it.


It's really revealing how you feel the need to editorialize. "OBSESSED!" If the story were as open and shut as you're painting it then you shouldn't feel the need to win people over by playing that game.

Shit, let's say all this is true. Obsessed ex. People attacking her for being a woman. Ok, so now what? Where does the "social justice" part fit in? Seems like SJWs like to pull this trick where they'll list out a bunch of bad things and then do a bunch of stuff themselves in retaliation, conveniently skipping over the part where they establish how and why they're justified in doing so. I keep saying it but you aren't getting it: the fact that someone does something wrong doesn't mean you get to subject them to whatever you want. You still have responsibilities.



I think you have to demonstrate that it wasn't about ethics. The gaming public has gradually become extremely suspicious of the gaming press over the last few years. Does the name Jeff Gerstmann ring a bell? Saying Zoe Quinn was entirely about gender is conjecture.


Again, so what? You keep attacking people (completely anonymous people, by the way) as if that somehow justifies the behavior of SJWs. Part of being the good guy means acting like one and doing do diligence, considering all possibilities, not just the most sinister ones, and most importantly not justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.


I think I absolutely can. You aren't automatically a good guy just because you've attacked a bad guy.


How can you say this without also acknowledging the hypocrisy of the SJW culture? Did Matt Taylor deserve what he got? "Harassment is harassment" is it not?


Again, this is nonsense. "Don't poke the bear"? How can you consider SJWs anything more than a vicious mob if this is how they justify themselves? So when someone does something that is wrong (or even just perceived as wrong) then that means the SJWs will emerge like Godzilla out of the Pacific to wreck their shit? And whatever happens, so be it? Whoever gets hurt, it's justified? Because "social justice"?


I'm going to flip this around. I don't think people deserve to get doxxed, fired, or publicly shamed just because they shit on something.

You do realize we're both saying we don't aqree with shitty behavior right? You realize we're agreeing. The only difference is for whatever reason you seem to be okay with people being assholes unless they're SJWs.

What happened to that guy that went into space is NOT okay. I'm not defending SJWs here as defined by the whole "keyboard warrior sounding like they have a cause but actually being bullies" thing.

But again. How come you seem to be so keen on defending peoples right to shit on other people EXCEPT when it's an SJW doing it? Oh and I type the way I do, because that's how I type. If you don't like it, don't read it or reply to it. *shrugs*

That's the definition of "social justice warrior" though. I think you're applying the term to just activism in general and saying you don't agree with the idiot activists. But that's not what an SJW is. An SJW is by definition one of the idiots of the type that attacked Matt Taylor. Someone who doesn't have a self-important sense of entitlement is not going to be an SJW.

Again, because SJW's do it with the attitude of "I am right, you are wrong. No wiggle room. You are bad, I am good because of what I think and because of what you think." - And that often justifies the bullying behaviour we are talking about.

If anyone does this, I am sure the people you are arguing with would also have a problem. Personally I find it even worse because Social Justice Warrior's assume they are morally superior.

Continue to defend activists (It was pretty funny when you called MLK a SJW) all you want, but this thread is about Social Justice Warriors.

The SJW is strong in this one...


MLK was a Civil Rights Activist, you imbecile. There is a difference between actually going out and doing something about the injustices in our world and being a fucking computer chair warrior and smashing a keyboard with cheeto crusted fingers (Cheddar Jalapeno Cheetos for the win as I type this)

Speak of the devil. SJWs at work:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32591260

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/05/04/joss-whedon-deletes-twitter-account-after-rabid-feminist-avengers-backlash/

See, this is what I'm talking about. These aren't activists trying to accomplish anything. They're just rabble rousers trying to engineer controversy. Literally two lines in an entire movie, both of which make perfect sense for the characters delivering them under the circumstances which they are spoken, and suddenly Joss Whedon is a sexist. Like, instant judgment. No discourse. No consideration given to context. Just, "Yup, he's officially a sexist. We've labeled him. So he must be punished."

Let me get caught up here.



Check out the pot calling the kettle black, guys. It's as if you're innocent of your own personal biases against the anti-SJW crowd. You labeled yourself an SJW, so I don't see why you're complaining. Own it if that's what you say you are.



That's quite the slippery slope there. You'd have all the racists and sexists locked away, until when? They can be brainwashed? Never?



It is when you mislabel people based on your own ideals.



So you say it's not the same, then proceed to try to rationalize how it is. Which is it?



SJWs never have and never will make the world a better place for anyone but themselves because they're effectively fascists. There's a reason why old school feminists, like Christina Hoff Sommers, have hopped off the bus a while ago; the third wave has completely bastardized the original vision of the movement. As far as their demands towards the various forms of media, you hit the nail on the head. They're not interested in doing any of the work themselves, only screaming their heads off until they're appeased.



Based on this comment, I'm guessing you either didn't read or simply skimmed through the threads after her reveal. Very few people who complained about her skin tone were that civil. Yes, Tanya was darker-skinned in all previous appearances, and I admit that I found it a bit off to see her like that in Story Mode. I'm glad they're making the adjustment, even though I absolutely would not crucify NRS if they didn't. I find Tanya to be a flat, one-dimensional character regardless of what her skin tone is. Maybe you didn't say it so angrily, but there were plenty who did. I'm honestly curious to see if they patch the game with her updated look in the story. If they don't, it'll create a laughable situation to say the least.



And yet these same people are the first to cry and label when someone says they don't like Jacqui or Kung Jin, even if their reasons are benign.



Nailed it. The request is not the issue, it's the way it's presented, usually as a kafkatrap or some similar method where any answer other than agreement is taken as proof that the person being asked is evil. It still goes back to the issue of the typical SJW doing nothing to help the causes they champion. Joss Whedon being forced to delete his Twitter is a crying shame. He's one of Hollywood's very best screenwriters and directors, and yet he's ducked away from social media because butthurt SJWs have the most undeserved sense of self-entitlement I've ever seen. If you don't cater to them, you're a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, a scumbag, etc.



Refer back to my first post in this thread. We tolerate SJWs because they have the same rights to free speech as everyone else, so we can't do anything to really police them. All the while, the SJWs strive to take that very same right away from anyone who doesn't agree with them, through doxxing, bullying, threatening, and the like. Picture terrorism, but without the bombs, and 99% of it being online because they're too chickenshit to actually do anything without a keyboard. That's SJWs.

Anyway, I'm probably done with this thread now, as I've stuck around longer than I wanted to and the same goes for my post volume. Cheers.

... Logic Wins.... Brutality!....

Couldn't help it lol.

I want to springboard off of this to point out that SJWs are pretty cynical people. You can tell that they don't have a very positive view of humanity because their instinct is to assume the worst. But that's a double edged sword when you assume the worst in people yet consider yourself one of the good guys. Because he's the thing. That comes with the responsibility of actually doing something. If there really are so many sexists and racists out there then presumably we encounter them all the time. So why aren't these SJWs actually confronting people on the street? Why are they not calling the police? Or taking advantage of whistleblower laws at their jobs?

It's like if you claim that there are so many bad people out there but you do nothing to protect their victims then doesn't that make you just as much part of the problem? How can you claim moral superiority in that case? Maybe the answer is that most people really don't suck all that much.



It goes to show how quickly they turn on you. Whedon was long known as one of the more progressive people in Hollywood. But then two lines show up that ruffles someone's feathers and then "he's a sexist." How does that work? Did the sexism fairy cast a spell on him one night? Was he always a sexist and just hid it really well throughout his entire career? There's no narrative in which these accusations make sense.

I love how people feel the need to pick apart my earlier comments posts after I already admitted that my arguments have been all over the place and unfocused.

I'm not okay with someone being blasted because of a joke. Joss Whedon being forced out over that is ridiculous.

Let me try, ONE last time to explain my stance.

To me, people are largely thin skinned. (I don't think people should be insulting other people over differing views but we all know how that works on the internet, nobody is innocent. Oh look I'm cynical.)

I couldn't give two craps about a joke. Joss Whedon doesn't deserve that shit. The guy getting launched into space doesn't deserve it. Game of Thrones didn't deserve the hate because it was more realistic in how it depicted a rather grotesque scene anyway. (Sorry, no mother in their right mind would have sex willingly in front of their dead kid. So I was quite okay with it being more of a rape. That's not being okay with rape, that's being okay with good storytelling.)

I don't judge someone because they like naked tits hanging out. Shit I played Guild Wars 2 for two years, and one of my characters was a half naked barbarian woman. Whatever.

My issue stands with what is legitimate shitty behavior. I like a good joke. I like jokes that are funny, regardless of content. Funny is funny.

My issue is for example, in Baltimore. We had the riot on Monday. People coming outright and saying "we should napalm the streets and clean out the city" is a horrible thing to say. Yes you have the right to say it. I have the right to think you're an asshole for these things.

It's one thing to not mind a game having half naked ladies in it. It's another thing to throw a hissy fit when a game DOESN'T have it, and act like a dick about it. Complaining that women are being catered to for example. That to me, is quite immature and yes, kinda misogynistic.

I don't believe in destroying anyone's life over a difference of opinion, but I do believe that yes, if you act in a way that is probably going to be viewed as idiotic to most folks, I'll judge you by that. Simple as that.

I never said y`all couldn`t make or want sexy characters, I`m more focused on the way people treat each other, and conduct themselves. I turned to video games to avoid people, but ended up joining a larger kommunity. Video games have brought us all together, from all over the world, to share ideas, and discuss the things we love. My Viking ancestor`s ``Heaven`` was called Valhallah. Warriors fought to the death, only to be revived to fight again. That sounds an awful lot like video games. My friends, we are already in heaven.

I`m not beating the fear of God into you with a torso sized book or begging for the cash monies. I have freely shared, and given inspiring kontent, and ideas. All I want is to keep playing the games I love, and that people learn to respect each other, and interact in a more positive manner.

I don`t understand people`s need to label everything. The terms like liberal repeatedly thrown around are so overused in the wrong context, I don`t even know or care what they mean.

Are you mad people are TRYING to change the world?
Are you mad people ARE changing the world?

I get venting. I don`t however appreciate the way everybody jumped on the negativity bandwagon in the Nightwolf thread I made in the MKX forum. The ignorant responces make me wonder if this thread was partly a responce to that, if not just the Jaquie(Kung Jin issues.

Labelling people trying to bring positive change as ``SJW``s so you can continue to spread hate.



Ka-Tra