TychoCelchuuu

Happy Thumbsgiving.

T-Minus 1 month and counting until a robot intimately exchanges someone's heart out of their chest.

The System Shock games weren't overly dirty or dark, all things considered. The upcoming Routine appears to have many non-dirty, non-dark areas. Miasmata is sort of dirty but not in the sense you mean, I think. Pathologic isn't really dirty or dark. The Void is dark but not in a "the lights are out" sense but rather in a "this is the void" sense which is maybe different.

If I had been unable to disable the "you made a choice" popup in TWD I would have been very upset, and I hated how The Walking Dead would always try to spoil the next episode (to the point where I closed my eyes and covered my ears during that part). I'm probably going to wait at least until the season wraps up to check out this game, mostly because I want to let feedback accrue, but "you can't turn off you made a choice popups" is almost a deal killer for me, I think.

TED talks are lying to you.

No, he's not even in the game.

So it's like babysitting then.

The main game is good, though!

Sounds like you're getting tired.

I love how the little bat creature from the Mos Eisley cantina is there.

I don't think you understood my post.

Works for me.

There actually is a thing called the Men's Rights Movement, its members being MRAs (Men's Rights Activists) but it turns out they are largely shitlords who hate women. Your basic problem in this thread is that you don't seem to understand social movements as social movements. You're only able to deal with a weird combination of abstract ideas and social movements, where you refuse to support an abstract idea because of the bad things that can be ascribed to a social movement and you refuse to support a social movement unless you can support its most closely linked abstract ideal. The first issue is that you refuse to be a feminist in the abstract idea sense because women and the people who support them have somewhere done something bad ever. This is a joke - feminists don't support everything that has ever been done in the name of women, even certain ostensibly feminist things, because feminism is a broad term that encompasses people who have different ideas about what ought to be done. This shouldn't stop anyone from being a feminist any more than Malcolm X should stop anyone from being a civil rights activist, even granting that they don't like Malcolm X. The second issue is that you fail to realize that feminism as a social movement is crucial to securing equal rights for everyone, which you claim to agree with. You think that you can only call yourself a supporter of equal rights, not a supporter of rights for women, because somehow the only social movements that are acceptable are the universal ones. This is blatantly false - it's possible to fix things on a small scale without denying that other things on a large scale also need fixing. This is where the MRA stuff kicks in. Men's rights as an abstract ideal is totally fine, and of course I (and everyone else in this thread) support men's rights. Why wouldn't we? There's not much of a point in saying it, but sure, we're all in favor of men's rights. On the other hand, though, the actual social movements behind men's rights groups right now are mostly toxic. They're awful. Does this mean we have to be against men's rights? Obviously not... all it means is that we don't want to join these social movements and throw our weight behind them. Nothing wrong with that. That's how life works.

I have never heard a feminist argue that men have only benefited from patriarchy and women have only suffered from it. A book I read recently was The Gender Knot, which is all about the patriarchy, and it, like every other feminist argument I've ever read, said that both sexes suffer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6jpIv7jJdA

Ahahah oh man, this is beautiful. It's like everything I love in a single article. A society where PUAs automatically "offend every [...] girl without even trying" is like, the ideal society.

In our society there are experiences that are more common or that are unique to people of the female sex, and experiences that are more common or that are unique to people who are gendered as women, which means that females and women will potentially have perspectives on various issues (like street harassment or child bearing or anything, really) which will be different from the kinds of perspectives males and men usually or can even potentially have. This does not mean any given expression of what a female or a woman thinks is necessarily from the perspective of someone who has the kinds of experiences that females or women tend to have or uniquely have in our society. It's of course true that this stuff shapes us both subtly and explicitly, but it shapes us into individuals, not categories, so all you're necessarily getting from, say, an Agnes Varda film is the viewpoint of an individual who is able to see things from certain perspectives that males and men might not be as inclined to see things from. Whether the movies Varda makes reflect this or not depends entirely on what kind of films she makes. And it certainly does not mean that movies she makes are representative of the perspective of every woman any more than anything I type (or, god forbid, anything thestalkinghead types) is representative of the perspective of every man. One of the strong tenets of modern feminist philosophy is feminist epistemology which relies on the idea of situated knowers and standpoint theory. The idea is that inhabiting a certain place and time and being a certain kind of person puts you in a situation where you can acquire various knowledge in light of these facts. That doesn't sound controversial, but it is when you realize that the opposite idea is that no matter who you are, you can (at least in principle) acquire any knowledge you want without having to be a certain kind of person. All you have to do is read a book or do a scientific study or something. Feminist epistemology challenges this and points out that there are certain things (say, what it's like to be harassed as a woman on the street in Western society) that you just aren't going to be able to fully understand from certain standpoints. Standpoint theory, then, explains why you might look to a woman to get the "woman's perspective" on things, rather than looking to a man. From it, though, we can't deduce that a woman will automatically give you the woman's perspective: all we know is that potentially she can access it. This says nothing about whether she'll put insights derived from that perspective into her movies.

Fear of labels that describe principles, I think. I don't know if thestalkinghead would refuse labels like "person" or "man" or "Idle Thumbs reader" or something.

The description you're looking for is "lacks principles," I think.

Anyone who can, with a straight face, reject feminism in part because of what certain feminists say, and at the same time call themselves a men's right activist, is a fucking idiot.

Quite a bit.

I love that game. The campaign was crippled by missions that were not just hard but also frustrating due to the stealth shit, the way only certain loadouts were good, and the lack of checkpoints, but aside from that, the game is amazing. Very few people make it through the training mission with all of their limbs. I think losing both legs is pretty common. And it's not like you need more games to play but personally I enjoyed the first System Shock more than System Shock 2, and I loved System Shock 2. Plus, yeah, the Thief games. You can play those...

Although Splinter Cell had the NSA pegged as bad guys (in Conviction) years before we knew they were doing terrible things.

I think it's a bit of both. Old games didn't give a shit if you lost sometimes. New games are deathly afraid of you ever entering a fail state that you don't instantly recover from.

It's not just a question of whether guys get called bossy - of course they do - it's a question of whether women get called bossy in situations where guys wouldn't get called bossy because that behavior wouldn't be perceived of as bossy if a guy were to do it.