Censorship? There is no censorship!

Remember when Jack THompson was ridiculed because he wanted to blame videogames as the primary source of violent tendencies? Now when they accuse videogames of being the source or the biggest offender of sexism and oppression those people are treated like heroes and devs that don't follow their little codes of conduct to be evil sexists. It's kind of funny.

I don't think it's that. It's more like, sexism in video games is just another symptom of the sexism in society and should thus be discussed and critizised accordingly so the video game industry can evolve just like other forms of media and the rest of society did and still do. It does seem weird that violence in video games are not supposed to have an effect on the kids, but sexism somehow does affect them. I think it's because violence is generally condemned while sexism is supposed to be so normalized that sexism in video games just reinforces it.
 
I would not say that violence in video games, movies or other forms of media don't have SOME effect on people. I mean I certainly don't think that it is healthy if you do nothing else but playing violent games ALL the time, just as I think it is a bit worrisome if you're watching nothing else but porn. I mean hey, everything we do affects us in some way, what ever if we admit it now or not. But in most games and movies the kind of violence you experience is simply too bizarre to play much of a role in our everyday life.

Maybe that is the difference? A normal, sane human being that isn't on the edge of mental collapse probably can easily tell that the mutants or terrorists he's killin in that video game right now are not real. Not even close to real life.

That is just me, but for example I always found subtle forms of violence a lot more ... disturbing in video games. Killing Nazi-Zombis with a machine gun? Exploding mutant heads? That is comical, in some way. But games where you're kicking the dog (figuratively)? Like shooting death-claw babies in New Vegas (DAMN YOU FOR MAKING ME DO THIS OBSIDIAN, MAY YOU BURN IN HELL D:!! 11)? That kinda makes me always cry a little inside.
 
Except when what constitutes "sexism" is extremely subjective, some people are very trigger happy with the label, and in some cases they don't care about having a discussion but rather about telling people what they can and can't do. Sometimes it actually feels like third wave feminists want to limit the roles of female characters even more.
 
Just give it time. That is their end goal.

Not really, no.

Remember when Jack THompson was ridiculed because he wanted to blame videogames as the primary source of violent tendencies? Now when they accuse videogames of being the source or the biggest offender of sexism and oppression those people are treated like heroes and devs that don't follow their little codes of conduct to be evil sexists. It's kind of funny.

Kind of shows you don't actually read what people have to say. Nobody is saying that video games are the cause of sexism and oppression, that's ridiculous. What is being said is that games can and often are sexist, which is a result of the generally sexist culture we live in. And people fairly criticize games for that, just how movies, books, music, and other works of culture are criticized.

Dealing with sexism and lack of representation in games is not the end solution of all sexism and oppression, but a step towards that goal.

Except a lot of gender "acitvists" do say that. Same way some feminists want to ban porn and call people that prefer shaved genitals pedophiles. Some don't, but if you want to ignore those to claim nobody says that you are the one who is being completely disingenuous. Funny you don't like your group being attacked by the actions of a few while actually doing that to other groups.
 
Except a lot of gender "acitvists" do say that. Same way some feminists want to ban porn and call people that prefer shaved genitals pedophiles. Some don't, but if you want to ignore those to claim nobody says that you are the one who is being completely disingenuous. Funny you don't like your group being attacked by the actions of a few while actually doing that to other groups.
Please point to people actually saying that video games are the cause of sexism and oppression, then. Because I don't know anyone who says that. I've never even seen anyone say anything that is remotely close to that. Anita Sarkeesian certainly doesn't. Nor does anyone else who's been discussed in the now 100 pages of GamerGate discussion. So who does? Who are you railing against?

Also, please don't double post. Use the Edit button.
 
Except when what constitutes "sexism" is extremely subjective, some people are very trigger happy with the label, and in some cases they don't care about having a discussion but rather about telling people what they can and can't do. Sometimes it actually feels like third wave feminists want to limit the roles of female characters even more.

No doubts about that. But even if you don't believe in Sexism in video games, you have at least to agree that it is a difference if I claim that Video games are sexist because of society or if I make the claim that Video games make you sexist. Two very different situations.


Sure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgT707uizYI&feature=player_detailpage#t=30
 
Last edited:
Don't insult my intelligence. I've played Tekken. She uses Eddie's move set. I watched the videos. I have a feeling you didn't read the link, or even know what the complaints are about. You don't have to play the game to see it is a cloned move set. I never said I wanted them to change it because of my values, which frankly you don't know dick about. I think the character is a joke. There is literally an almost exact duplicate of that same character, minus the cat theme, in the new DOA5. It's unimaginative, boring, and I think it goes to show why Tekken has decreased in quality over the years.
Actually, I'd argue the downward decline of Tekken has NOTHING to do with any of that. It's just the way the story started out as a pretty generic "lot's of strong people FIGHTING!" and by the sequel they made it very supernatural and epic. From 2-5 (and even Tag) the series had some relative consistency in its supernatural elements, and it was always showcasing that there were the characters; and then there were THESE characters, the characters no one else could possibly measure up to. Lee would never be able to go toe-to-toe with his step brother Kazuya, but Kazuya's half-brother could, because it was the blood of this particular family. The only characters capable of rivaling them were the likes of the walking dead, like Bryan, or the designed-to-be-ridiculously-badass-on-purpose Paul Phoenix, and of course the supernatural cast, like Devil, Angel, Ogre, and Unknown. By 4 they watered down the supernatural by making it all about genetics (midichlorians, anyone?) and they rebounded in 5 by making it once again something about the Mishima Clan being "cursed". It had its ups and downs, but those 4 titles really were the best of the serries. By 6, the story had grown more and more ridiculous, there was no stopping how absurd things could get anymore. They were just adding more characters (I hated the Dark Resurrection cast they threw in for 5, it was a travesty) because they could, and as Steve Fox proves, they weren't taking much time to BALANCE any of them, really. The series just absorbed more shit by 6, and it wasn't because of scantily clad girls that it found itself in this decline. Frankly I really liked what they did with Asuka and Ling, and both were decidedly covered up in all of their outfits.

But Christie is and isn't an Eddie clone. She USED to be, back in Tekken 4, her introduction, and in the home console version of the game you could play as Eddie again (in the arcade version, Eddie was absent) by selecting an alternate costume for Christie. But this changed by 5 and 6. In those games, like Siegfried and Nightmare from the Soul Calibur series, the two became distinct characters. Only in Christie's and Eddie's cases, the differences were FAR less pronounced. Christie's reach was shorter, but she was slightly faster. Eddie was slower but his reach was longer. They DID have some unique moves between the two but, unlike when Team Soul created an ENTIRELY NEW moveset for Nightmare post-SC2, they still played almost identically. So, nitpicking aside, they're effectively alternate skins right now. To be exact, they're not, but the differences are so small, that for all intents and purposes... they are.
 
"Research conducted by Tracy L. Dietz, professor of Sociology & Anthropology at the University of Central Florida, found that allegedly nearly 80 percent of the video games had some violence and aggression as part of the main strategy or object. In 21 percent of the games, she claims that violence was directed specifically towards women. Also in 28 percent of the games women were, according to Dietz, seen as sex objects and in 41 percent of the games there were no female characters. Overall Dietz asserted that most video games minimize the role of females or leave females out of the game all together, and that when females were shown they were usually depicted in a supporting role to men or dependent upon the male. Women were also seen as contributing less than males and were their sex objects. Dietz states that these depictions of women may allow boys and girls to internalize and accept the thought that women are victims, weak, and sex objects."
Hmmmm......

So let's see in only 21 percent of the 80 percent of all games there was violence directed at women, so doesn't that mean that in 79% of the cases violence was directed at non females? So okay, first idea, there can never be any representation of violence against women. So then in most cases women are only support characters and that's bad, but then they can't be victimized by fictional violence ever, because that's bad too, so you want women to be main characters or play non support roles, but you want this to be done while also not showing any indication that those women would suffer any form of violence, because that normalizes violent behavior against females. So... that means that we should limit the roles they can assume even more? Because they can't be affected by violence, yet they can't be support characters.... so they shouldn't exist I guess, or they should be invincible and invulnerable shields that are there just to show women.

Then also comes the thing of only certain kinds of women being allowed to be represented, forms of dress, personality types, body types and mentality towards sex, those have to be regulated too. Because everyone knows women that are sexual are indecent and amoral beings that deserve no respect or representation I guess....

And here comes tokenism, using people of the designated minority, not as characters on equal footing and inclusion as the white cis gendered male characters, but as things that show that you are totally not racist/sexist. That's all they are good for anyway.

Man wikipedia is now full of stub articles on this... guess that's all the self called activists actually do....
 
Last edited:
I just started watching this guy, Akratus:



I've only watched a few videos he's made so far but I'm enjoying them. Already subscribed to his channel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Except a lot of gender "acitvists" do say that. Same way some feminists want to ban porn and call people that prefer shaved genitals pedophiles. Some don't, but if you want to ignore those to claim nobody says that you are the one who is being completely disingenuous. Funny you don't like your group being attacked by the actions of a few while actually doing that to other groups.

Then provide proof of who is saying what you claim. Preferably people who aren't obviously insane, like Femitheist (has since retracted her ideas about an international castration day for males, though I'm sure you can find a copy of that on the web), or otherwise compose a fringe part of the thought.

A propos your group: When pretty much every major news outlet in the world is critical of a particular group, it's kind of hard to take that group seriously. Maybe, just maybe, sometimes the bad guys are the mainstream and the good guys the fringe?
 
Oh so then the ones that do that are not real feminists and should not be taken into account. Funny how that can only be used by third wave feminists, yet when Gamergate does it they are liers.
Also here comes the completely dumb black and white narrative, there have to be good guys and bad guys, sexism needs a face you can punch, or at least yell at, no it's not an abstract thing deeply rooted in the culture of a lot of countries, no, it's something you can yell at, you can cure it by harasing the undesirable, is not something that requires effort to solve, it's something that just needs the appropiate amount of whinning.
 
Gee, I wonder where some posts from the last page have gone?

"Sure,bro", there is no censorship on this forum!

Vats as usual. Wasn't it mostly some retarded back and forth with SnapSlav and a few other people, not exactly on topic (whatever the topic really is)?
 
Of course Surf Solar calling some people trannies or whining men or tumblrinas is VAT-worthy. But calling me hitler is sensible.



Hitler isn't an insult but tranny is?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It appears that that's what Sander/Tagaziel believe. But I'm saying allowing one but not the other is silly.
 
Of course Surf Solar calling some people trannies or whining men or tumblrinas is VAT-worthy. But calling me hitler is sensible.
Oh, didn't notice that exchange yet. Yeah, not all that necessary to vat that, although it probably didn't go anywhere.
 
Hitler isn't an insult but tranny is?

well first and foremost, Hitler is a name. Maybe we got Tagz intentions wrong? Who knows. Looking at it, Hitler was in WW1, he was a Soldier, he was not the best Soldier, but he was not a coward either, it turns out that he was not THAAAAT bad as painter either, he sold some as post cards. And he was a vegetarian, known to love animals and children. So for all we know he was an average man. Maybe that is the stuff Tagz had in mind with Akratus. I fear, we will never know.

Though, I do agree that it was somewhat uncalled for.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top