thestalkinghead

but if you have come to the conclusion that women should be held in equal regard as men without feminism, saying "you are a bad person if you aren't a feminist" sounds alot like "if you aren't a christian you are a bad person" why do i have to be a feminist to think women are equal to men? ("you are automatically a feminist if...." statements annoy me) maybe i am just arguing for independent ethics there, but i think insulting people will automatically put people on the defensive, so feminists should try not to insult people if they actually want to be listened to and taken seriously

well maybe it's a perspective thing, if you totally agree with something it's hard to see it from someone elses perspective, religious extremists probably think they are they are being totally reasonable and that people who disagree with them are just being concern trolls, when they might actually agree with them but not their approach

i just said that maybe it was a separate discussion

if the definition of a feminist was purely "a feminist is just someone who holds women in equal regard" then i am a feminist, but i don't want to be associated with people who think being angry at people is a good way of getting their point across. and Clyde maybe tone is a separate discussion than the actual core principles of feminism, but i think it is still a valid discussion and it shouldn't be dismissed by calling people who wan't to talk about it "concern trolls"

I'm not being dismissive, i am trying to explain my position on the subject, i could say what you just said was dismissive or that TychoCelchuuu was being dismissive by saying "Notice, for instance, that far from being castigated for his approach, Dawkins' brand of "militant atheism" has a lot of followers. It's the hip new brand of atheism that all the kids love! And although I don't like how Dawkins gets angry because I think he's wrong about certain things and thus has no cause to get angry, I would never begrudge him his anger if he were at all correct. If teaching children religion is child abuse, then he has a right to get angry about it if he wants! And if feminists are right, we have a right to get angry about certain things." because i am saying that i don't like his approach. i am not saying people don't have the right to get angry and they should shut up, i am saying that if you want to convince someone about something or get them on your side, getting angry at them is a bad way of doing it, the person who is the most angry in an argument doesn't automatically win.

here is an example of what i don't like (above), yes i do care about the tone because i think it is important, and i agree 100% with what Twig said "because what tone is acceptable is set by the patriarchy" this is the kind of thing that just makes you sound completely unreasonable

no, i can't even think of any feminists in films, so i have no idea what you may be referring to (but obviously i would be against strawman feminists). i am just against immature hateful feminist that say things like "all men are sexist" or "misandry doesn't exist" or just people who spin everything in male culture into sexism, or people whose definition of the male gender includes sexism or misogyny. or just like what i said the Richard Dawkins approach (crude imitation of richard dawkins, who i do actually respect and agree with a lot but not his approach) "oh, you belive in god, you must be an idiot" so the feminist version would be "oh, you don't agree with every aspect of feminism, you must be a misogynist" sure most of that is just a tone thing, but tone matters to me, so like with Richard Dawkins i can agree with what he is trying to do, but disagree with how he does it, same with feminism.

not read everything but that first article is very good so far edit: i will try and read all the links on that page tomorrow because it's late and I'm tired, but feminism is complicated (and i think it needs to be). i guess i am mainly against the more radical or militant forms of feminism or the Richard Dawkinslike approach to feminism, and maybe i sort of am one form of feminist (need more research to know what type) but i don't like to get too specific about these things, rock music is just rock music to me

the thing is, i have been researching feminism and i just want to sort the crazies from the actual real thing

is there some sort of official Feminist manifesto? so that i could compare it with what self proclaimed feminists write and say "this isn't feminism, and this is" because if even people who call themselves feminists don't know what it is how is anybody else supposed to know?

http://youtu.be/xUdaPNXC_68

i said it isn't ALL as reasonable as that (changed the wording slightly because i realise "all that reasonable" can be read in a way it wasn't intended) implying that some is and some isn't, which is true, like Problem Machine and clyde were saying above

i said you were being reasonable Mr Angry edit: maybe i needed more punctuation or something, because i meant what you said was reasonable but not all of feminism is (that reasonable)

well i think that sex has large influence on gender, i don't think it is a 1:1 correlation but they influence each other strongly (meaning the differences aren't all social constructs), and you are putting across the "good" side of feminism it isn't all that reasonable

thats cool, because even if i wouldn't call myself a feminist i am still on the side of a lot of the ideas and principles behind it, just not enough to be part of the group

I'm not organised enough to do that (i would have to spend hours searching my internet history and reading through every page, and I'm not that invested in this argument to do that), but if you look up feminist blogs etc. there will be a lot of talk about the erosion of gender and gender roles or just the general dislike of masculinity especially, if you want to do you own research that's fine, but i'm not going to do it for you, I'm not trying to be rude it's just that links to websites just isn't the way i learn or organise things, and a link to one or two pages wouldn't be enough anyway

that sounds great, but it takes a long time to actually get to know somebody, i wish there was technology that existed that you could introduce yourself with your entire life story, like "hello I'm *data transfer* nice to meet you" obviously you can always meet people with an open mind but that doesn't help to get to know somebody any quicker. but what i am really talking about is not about what people infer, but more that biology does have an effect on behaviour, people don't like to believe that and obviously you couldn't just test someones DNA and predict everything they will ever do or believe, but i think people that want to eradicate gender are being very ignorant of how and why people behave the the way they do

that is what i have read a lot of feminist talk about, the idea of masculinity and femininity or gender is inherently bad and everybody should act the same, whereas i think there is a big difference between giving people equal respect and expecting everybody to act the same

but from what i can tell about feminism is that the ultimate goal is to eradicate the whole idea of gender and as i said i think that is ridiculous

one of my biggest problems with feminism is that it's called feminism, modern feminism may claim that their goal is to make the world more equal and that it would also help men but the helping men part just seems like a minor side quest, the main quest is to empower women (which is a worthy goal) but the problem with making things equal is by what standard to you make things equal by, do they want men to act more like women or women to act more like men? Because although men and women are both human (obviously) they are biologically different enough to have a totally different perspective of everything, and i don't just mean the body, i mainly mean the brain, in my opinion what we call masculinity and femininity is just what we have named the effect of our different biology, it's a bit like psychological problems, most of them are caused by biology, a psychopath actually has a different brain than a non psychopath and their behaviour is caused by this physical difference, so the idea of eradicating gender roles or gender altogether just seems ridiculous to me, because it would only benefit one gender and that would be the gender that had been chosen to be the norm. if there was a group or a movement that was set up to appreciate these differences in gender while at the same time trying to make the world a fairer place (equal respect, equal rights, equal pay for equal work, equal rights for parents etc.) i would be totally behind that, but i would never call myself a feminist even though i agree with a lot of their goals, i am just not 100% behind them.

i agree that you don't need any of the nostalgia for the setting to enjoy it, but it helps, it helps with the immersion in the same way that you know what is like "to fall in love, to get hurt, to feel unfulfilled or unfaithful." obviously it isn't exactly the same, but if there was nothing in the game that you were familiar with it would have a lot less meaning to you, i don't think any theme is really truly universal just very common. like you i have had a very different life to Sam, I'm english, I'm a man, I'm not gay and i had never heard of riot Grrl, but it was the similarities that helped me to see the world from her point of view (empathy) in a way Sam was like a gay female american version of me born a few years earlier, yeah that sounds very different, but she is a fan of rock music (including Nirvana which i am a fan) she is the younger one of the sisters (my sister is 3 years older than me) she liked drawing and she was a bit of a rebel, and there are lots more similarities including certain family stuff (and these things would take a lot of explaining if you weren't familiar with them), i could go on (but i won't) i think if i was a tribesman from the rainforest i don't think the game would have had the same impact on me without a serious education in western culture, most fiction has greater significance if they feel familiar, even if they are set in a fantasy/sci-fi world, it will be the things that are familiar that resonate the most with people.

i agree, it's great to hear, because vice city and san andreas knew they were crazy and embraced it, but 4 tried to pretend it was all serious and that kind of ruined a lot of the fun

that story is so vague i can't tell what the guy was angry about, you may as well have just said "some guy was angry at me and my colleagues and i tried not get angry back" but that is a situation i am can empathise with and it sucks to be on the receiving end of angry guy

i disagree with that spoiler

yeah, i think there is little doubt about that, the sandbox/missions parts are definitely gonna be fun, it's just the rest that has people criticizing it