Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

IIRC, It started with #YesAllWomen, which was used for women to tell stories of how the experiences sexism or aggression. Then there was #NotAllMen, which was mostly guys feeling the need to point out they didn't feel sexist. Then there was #YesAllMen, which seems to be mostly trolling #YesAllWomen and/or bashing feminists.

[smeeprocket]

It's a very dangerous thing to mock. And "not all xxx are like that" is a favorite of racists.

I don't see any good reason to deny the need to avoid generalisation.

as I have said repeatedly in recent posts, and which I will repeat one more time:

Anytime a feminist or any women has a complaint about things men do to her, men will require coddling, they require assurance that they aren't the bad guys, that they aren't like this, and generally make the whole thing about them and their needs.

It has nothing to do with generalizations because feminists never said any of it was all men to begin with.

It is a way of putting a woman on the defensive, such as is occurring now, to prevent actual discussion of the problem.

The past few pages make this point for me.

I don't remember #yesallwomen from before, but the feed now is pretty ugly.

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23yesallwomen&src=typd

[Phmcw]

Doesn't look like it. This is the story I know, the meme was sarcastic.

[Neonivek]

Anytime a feminist or any women has a complaint about things men do to her, men will require coddling, they require assurance that they aren't the bad guys, that they aren't like this, and generally make the whole thing about them and their needs

Ohh no... Men are sensitive? NOOOO!

Ok, sorry bad joke. But I laughed.

You generally need to because usually when these conversations are brought up in polite conversation there is a harsh accusatory tone that comes from it. Usually from school.

[Caz]

As for women tending to be the victims in videogames.

Pretty much making someone close to the protagonist the victim is the "easiest" method to invest the player in the plot.

The "opposite gender" pairing seems to also be firmly ingrained as well in that... well...

If the protagonist is male and they have one living parent it will likely be his mother. If the protagonist is female and they have one living parent, it will likely be her father.

If the protagonist is female and they have one sibling they are likely a brother. If they are Male it is likely a sister.

Bonus points for Card Captor Sakura where both her living parent and sibling are both male.

Now if the main character is female and she has no parents and a sibling who takes care of them... They are likely a sister. If male then a brother.

Yea, this phenomenon helps with the commonness of female chars being the damsels-in-distress/token plot killing to galvanise the protagonist into doing something. Since most protagonists are male...

Dragon Age 2 had a similar concept except not really defined by gender. The sister of the protagonist was mage, the brother of the protagonist was a warrior. If your char is mage, the sister dies, and if you're not, vice versa.

...Even though that game was hours of running around repetitive dungeons forever. Agh.

[Sheb]

To be honest, depending on how the complaints are voiced, it can sound like a woman is accusing all men, which will of course put many of them on the defensive. Just like you felt on the defensive when people were saying "feminists can be blablabla".

[smeeprocket]

Anytime a feminist or any women has a complaint about things men do to her, men will require coddling, they require assurance that they aren't the bad guys, that they aren't like this, and generally make the whole thing about them and their needs

Ohh no... Men are sensitive? NOOOO!

Ok, sorry bad joke. But I laughed.

You generally need to because usually when these conversations are brought up in polite conversation there is a harsh accusatory tone that comes from it. Usually from school.

more like... entitled, but your joke wasn't funny.

It's like this, if a black person comes up to me and wants to discuss the things white people have done on a day to day basis to oppress them, and I keep interrupting them to let them know that I personally am totally not like that and I know plenty of decent white people, I am completely blocking out their suffering to assuage my uncomfortableness over it and my "White guilt." It makes it about me, and it isn't about me.

[Toady One]

First off, VoxieG has been confirmed as a ban-dodge account and is toast.  The previous account won't be named so as to avoid their perverse glorification.  As far as I can tell, it wasn't magic missile.  I'd say it wasn't Pathos, but you wouldn't believe me.

When I arrived at this thread today, it was locked, presumably by the OP.  Since there's no post by the OP regarding the lock, I'm not sure what the intent was (or even if the OP locked it), but I accidentally unlocked and locked it again, so the OP can't unlock it now.  I'd rather give the OP the choice back, so I'm unlocking it, but the OP might lock it again if they notice.  It's all very complicated.

In any case, if you want to keep this thread, there are going to have to be further efforts made.  I'd prefer if people not make quips or short, trolling-type remarks in here at all now, though not everybody is going to read this post so it's the kind of thing that might require a more structured OP and the retirement of the current thread at some point.

[UXLZ]

The thread is getting a bit bloated at this point...

I'd be in support of a new thread with discussion points in the OP to help keep things a little more focused (like, sexualisation, character portrayal, usage as motivation and so on). The issue is that things like this topic tend to branch out a lot by nature.

[pisskop]

I did lock it, and I was intending to unlock it.  Thanks Toady!

I know I don't post much in here, but I check it a few times a day.  I love the idea of impassioned and honest debate, but don't want to have to get several messages about an otherwise civil thread :/

[smeeprocket]

We'd just be hashing the same things out in the new thread, tho.

Pisskop seems willing to lock this one if it gets crazy, so we might as well stick here. Also, if I get not lazy I can scroll back and link things from previous points, because having new people jump in and argue things that have already been discussed into the dirt is exhausting.

[UXLZ]

True enough, though we'll likely be going in circles here as well... Sometimes I swear I'm the only person who's ever willing to concede a point... Mm, well, people have very strong opinions. The only thing that can change them is themselves.

[Arcvasti]

True enough, though we'll likely be going in circles here as well... Sometimes I swear I'm the only person who's ever willing to concede a point... Mm, well, people have very strong opinions. The only thing that can change them is themselves.

Cold-blooded torture and brainwashing work pretty well too, although its trickier to administer them through a public internet forum.

[Urist Tilaturist]

Why does the torture have to be cold blooded? Besides, that usually achieves more superficial compliance than a sincere change of beliefs, as is the case with all coercion.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

True enough, though we'll likely be going in circles here as well... Sometimes I swear I'm the only person who's ever willing to concede a point... Mm, well, people have very strong opinions. The only thing that can change them is themselves.

Cold-blooded torture and brainwashing work pretty well too, although its trickier to administer them through a public internet forum.

It's totally off topic, but that's actually not the case. Both torture and brainwashing are very hit-or-miss strategies. Some people are just plain unreachable by these methoids and will endure anything. Some will only be vulnerable to very specific elements. And some will fold like gelatin in the Siberian wilderness.