Violence as Fetish in Games

[Kim]

I wrote a comparison between straight male targeted porn sites and video game violence. (http://maximummisandry.tumblr.com/post/51732542184/violence-as-fetish)

Here's an excerpt...

Even though I find porn sites the most effective way to destroy any idea of what healthy sexuality is, I am willing to consider that there might be a place for such things. Perhaps there is room for the uncanny valley of straight male porn.

...

Except it has too much room. Too much space. Videos of trans women having sex with men dehumanize and fetishize us. To find porn of anyone who isn’t white, you must swim through an ocean of racism. Finding lesbian porn that isn’t made for straight men is a special kind of hell.

Straight male porn exists at the expense of all other forms.

Straight male porn is destroying our understanding of sexuality.

I thought some here might appreciate this piece.

[Red Mage Black]

I just read the whole of what you wrote and I'm still trying to understand it. I guess my comprehension and understanding are pretty subpar. I don't really see the comparison? Well, there are many examples I could name off as fetishized violence such as Skull Girls, the Dead or Alive series, the Tomb Raider series, Lollipop Chainsaw and Catherine(not including some popular MMOs).

But I have to ask, out of curiosity, what IS 'straight male porn'? You name off transgender and racial, but not gay/lesbian/bi? I mean, I've also seen a pretty numerous amount of interracial stuff around. Black/Latino/Asian/etc. I do agree that it's pretty disgusting to see how people are portrayed as stereotypes based on their ethnicity/preferences/sexuality/gender and are made to act like it on camera. Professional porn is pretty bad with that stuff. I think the 'delivery boy' thing is stupid anyway. A guy that looks THAT GOOD would not be a delivery boy, other things aside.

As for what else you say in your observations and I can't speak for everyone else on this, if I'm having sex, I don't expect it to be like some porno. I don't expect her to be screaming or orgasming all over the place. The most I can hope for is that they're enjoying it as much as I am, because if they aren't, then it makes me feel guilty. (As a general rule, if I'm doing something/anything with anyone, if they don't enjoy it, then I just can't. I like having fun, but not at the expense of their boredom.)

Now, the question of, "Don't you feel bad for killing these people?" When you compared it to the 'extra sausage' thing. Maybe I'm naive, maybe I still don't know if I comprehend it, but it seems to me an unfair question. Because at least to me, it feels like you're comparing real murder to destroying a bunch of pixels and polygons on screen. It wasn't entirely clarified if you were talking about such games as I listed in the first paragraph or simply violent video games in general, so I apologize for the assumption. (Ass out of you and me, etc.) I'd like to think the statistics I've heard for violent video games actually bringing DOWN violent crime statistics are true. They're meant to be a break from reality and violent video games like... say... Mad World, No More Heroes or Resident Evil are meant to be sort of like stress relievers.

I think I went off topic a little there, so I'll come back around and ask my (slightly revised) question, "What is the basis for these comparisons?" Because I guess I don't see them.

And Kim? I come to threads like these for the sole fact of learning more. So I apologize if my post sounds a little derisive. I feel sometimes I also need further clarification by stating my opinions and own observations to see what I'm doing wrong. I enjoy learning, I love learning. I do credit you and Pocheros for giving me some better outlooks.

[POS Industries]

Well, there are many examples I could name off as fetishized violence such as Skull Girls
I never understood why detractors of Skullgirls can never be bothered to type the name right.

Like I guess I just want to jump in here and note that I agree that some of the character designs are certainly sexually exploitative to notable degrees but if you want to argue that the "fetishized violence" in it is degrading to women for the benefit of the straight male gaze, it also needs to be noted that most of the sexualized elements come from the game's animation, which is overseen and largely drawn by the game's lead animator, Mariel Cartwright, and I would suggest taking it up with her if you think it's a problem from a social justice standpoint.

[Kim]

I don't think Skullgirls has fetishized violence. It has sexualized violence or violence in a sexual context.

When I say fetishized violence, I mean more stuff like Bioshock Infinite and Metal Gear Rising.

Gallons of blood. Make a man shoot himself with a tommygun. Butcher a person into tiny bits and rip out their spine. Watch a person devoured by crows, then use that power on others.

I'd like to think the statistics I've heard for violent video games actually bringing DOWN violent crime statistics are true. They're meant to be a break from reality and violent video games like... say... Mad World, No More Heroes or Resident Evil are meant to be sort of like stress relievers.

I do not argue in my piece for the non-existence of such games, but criticize that this presentation of violence crowds out all others and hurts understanding of violence.

As far as I've seen, there've been no conclusive studies about the relationship between committing violence and playing violent games.

However, anyone who claims that games or porn have zero/minimal affect on perception of the world around them is ignorant. The culture we consume changes us. "It's just fiction," is not a refutation of that. While playing a game may not make you more likely to commit violence, your awareness of its non-real nature does not mean it has no affect on how you perceive and think about violence.

If war films can have a significant increase on military recruitment, then video games surely have some subconscious influence on us as well.

[POS Industries]

I don't think Skullgirls has fetishized violence. It has sexualized violence or violence in a sexual context.

When I say fetishized violence, I mean more stuff like Bioshock Infinite and Metal Gear Rising.

Gallons of blood. Make a man shoot himself with a tommygun. Butcher a person into tiny bits and rip out their spine. Watch a person devoured by crows, then use that power on others.
Yeah, that sounds about right.

[Red Mage Black]

I never understood why detractors of Skullgirls can never be bothered to type the name right.


Wasn't trying to sound like a detractor. Never said it was a 'bad' game. I was merely pointing out games with sexualized elements in them. Never played it, so I don't really have an opinion outside of observation here. As for who did the animations, does it matter if it was a man or a woman? Seems awfully biased to think only men would create something to appeal to men.

I don't think Skullgirls has fetishized violence. It has sexualized violence or violence in a sexual context.

When I say fetishized violence, I mean more stuff like Bioshock Infinite and Metal Gear Rising.

Gallons of blood. Make a man shoot himself with a tommygun. Butcher a person into tiny bits and rip out their spine. Watch a person devoured by crows, then use that power on others.

Ah, so now I understand it more. I'm still not entirely sure on the parallels you're pointing out. So, to add to that list is the God of War series, Heavenly Sword(?) and maybe the Devil May Cry games? The latter doesn't seem too bad? As I mentioned in my first post, No More Heroes and Mad World also seem likely candidates for that, too.

I mean, I guess I just haven't done enough research into what you're suggesting may be actual parallels between fetishized violence and porn. Uh, I'll at least ask, "Could you give me a suggestion for a good place to start from?" You are, by no means, obligated to comply and I understand that. It's just a request.

[Kim]

Main similarities: Dehumanization of victims. Exist to service a mainstream idea of what masculinity is (Domination, power, strength). Distortion of the reality of sex and violence in the name of just getting you off. Orgasm and the way violence climaxes in video games comparable.

[POS Industries]

As for who did the animations, does it matter if it was a man or a woman? Seems awfully biased to think only men would create something to appeal to men.
I'm just saying that you'd have to take it up with her with regards to whom the animations are meant to appeal and how a woman should express female sexuality in her own art.

All of which seems like a shitty thing to do, and I'm not about to be the guy to go mansplaining at her about it.

[Magus]

It can be quite hard to find some "classy" porn with a decent cinematic treatment but it does exist, even in the "hardcore" category (i.e. genitals, penetration, etc.).

The reason it is pretty far between is because for the most part it's a for-profit business and it's probably one of the most profitable businesses for producers there is because all it has to do is "get people off", and that's easy to do even with terrible lighting, unemotional humping, bad set design, and horrible angles.

I do have to say I do not like the ones with a "plot", though. But I do prefer everyone involved at least look like they're having a good time instead of what 95% of the pornography out there provides.

Of course, I am probably not a true "connoisseur" because I hardly ever watch it and when I do I attempt to find something with some decent chops.

As for fetishized violence, probably the most violent game I have played is Manhunt which, I mean, the actual plot is that you are being held prisoner and forced to fight your way out of a "most dangerous game" situation so a sleazy guy can make snuff films out of the kills. And the kills are definitely stylized/fetishized in that they are quite brutal (suffocating people with plastic bags, castrating them with sickles, stabbing them with crowbars, that sort of thing). It's definitely done on purpose.

[Red Mage Black]

Main similarities: Dehumanization of victims. Exist to service a mainstream idea of what masculinity is (Domination, power, strength). Distortion of the reality of sex and violence in the name of just getting you off. Orgasm and the way violence climaxes in video games comparable.

Though I can't see many people actually masturbating to that stuff in much of the stuff I mentioned, but as I've told people I know in RL(just to irk them, mostly), "If it exists, someone probably has a fetish for it." Which to me, seems mostly true. Yet yes, it sickens me to see the type of people who actually 'get off' to it.

Psychologically? I don't think I can really use that term, but I'll toss it out and see what sticks. I guess you're comparing blood fountains and whatnot to orgasm? Just checking. Yeah, I can see that(Vamp from MGS2 comes to mind for that one.) I suppose there's a comparable difference between violence for the sake of violence(fetishized violence) and the competitiveness of some games that entail violence in competition?


I don't usually play a game unless it has a good story. Playing the game itself, to me, is just to see more of the story. Invincible/Macho heroes are boring to me though, even with a story behind it. Hunted: The Demon's Forge would have been good if E'lara wasn't just a sexualized female elf. She had enough character to dress less... fetishy. Despite the game's claim to the outfit having more maneuverability. Though I think I liked the fact that it didn't dwell on anything relationship wise between Caddoc and E'lara other than implying they were simply mutual partners in the whole deal.

Not sure I should bring up sports since you said video games, but all major sports, not including golf, come to mind. There's also other major games like Modern Warfare, Gears of War(machismo all around) and PVP in MMORPGs in general.

I'm probably going to hate myself for posting this, but the only way I'll learn is by seeing what I'm doing wrong:
Predisposition to dominate is a genetic male trait, yes, but these days its become an obsolete thing, what with how culture has changed in the last millenia. With women in high/important positions, according to what industry/sector they're in, but still outnumbered by their male peers. Power and Strength fall under this already, but it's under the same status as their origin. A lot of men still feel threatened by women in higher positions than themselves.

I guess I just don't feel that drive to really be all that competitive or dominant, which is a pity, because in the right circumstances it's suppose to be a good thing.

And if I ask too many specifics, it's attributed to my learning curve. Which likes to make it appear to be a bell curve. I learn by doing, so that's why I say what I do. It's no excuse to look like a foolish misogynist, but I ask you please forgive me for any apparent transgressions.

I'm just saying that you'd have to take it up with her with regards to whom the animations are meant to appeal and how a woman should express female sexuality in her own art.

All of which seems like a shitty thing to do, and I'm not about to be the guy to go mansplaining at her about it.

Um... okay. Yeah, I'm... I guess I'm going to stop you right there. I see a continuing gender bias here. Maybe I just don't understand it, is all. Though um... here's how I'm seeing it and correct me if I'm wrong:

* A man does the same thing and it's sexist/simply appealing to other men(?)
* A woman does it and it's simply expressing female sexuality(?)
* The fact that it appeals to men as well is just a consequence of it. It's not the intended effect and it's not exactly a bad thing. Just as a lot of expression/actions has other unintended circumstances attached.

I suppose this circles around to, "If a man can do it, so can a woman." Which should also work vice versa. Only, if the man gets it wrong, there's a lot of flak attached to it. Which, if the ideals of feminism are what I was told, it shouldn't be the case that a man can't do the same. (Yes, I would certainly love to see what a woman would do with such a thing, in a more male oriented game, to appeal to men. Fair is fair, after all. Men already know or at least think they know, what their peers want.)


As for fetishized violence, probably the most violent game I have played is Manhunt which, I mean, the actual plot is that you are being held prisoner and forced to fight your way out of a "most dangerous game" situation so a sleazy guy can make snuff films out of the kills. And the kills are definitely stylized/fetishized in that they are quite brutal (suffocating people with plastic bags, castrating them with sickles, stabbing them with crowbars, that sort of thing). It's definitely done on purpose.

I agree with the rest of your post. Professional, at least most professional porn, is pretty damn stupid. I can't wrap my head around even the better stuff though. More an amateur/homemade fan myself.

Anyway, on to what I quoted. Manhunt yes and it's the same with me. Most violent game I've ever played. Some of the kills I couldn't watch without feeling nausea. The game itself is, yep, appealing to that sort of thing. I don't think the story behind it does any real justice either. It's one big snuff fetish game. Rockstar outdid themselves with that one.

[POS Industries]

Um... okay. Yeah, I'm... I guess I'm going to stop you right there. I see a continuing gender bias here. Maybe I just don't understand it, is all. Though um... here's how I'm seeing it and correct me if I'm wrong:

* A man does the same thing and it's sexist/simply appealing to other men(?)
* A woman does it and it's simply expressing female sexuality(?)
* The fact that it appeals to men as well is just a consequence of it. It's not the intended effect and it's not exactly a bad thing. Just as a lot of expression/actions has other unintended circumstances attached.

I suppose this circles around to, "If a man can do it, so can a woman." Which should also work vice versa. Only, if the man gets it wrong, there's a lot of flak attached to it. Which, if the ideals of feminism are what I was told, it shouldn't be the case that a man can't do the same. (Yes, I would certainly love to see what a woman would do with such a thing, in a more male oriented game, to appeal to men. Fair is fair, after all. Men already know or at least think they know, what their peers want.)
The problem is that all things aren't equal. When it's done for men by men, it does so at the expense of women. When it's done for anyone by women, it's not as harmful because it is a woman expressing her own sexuality with the agency to do so. To tell a woman that it's wrong for her to create sexualized works because a man can't or that it is okay for a man to exploit women because a woman expresses herself in a visually similar manner is unfair to the woman because men are typically already placed in a position of power over her by society.

There's also the factor of reclamation of the tools of oppression, in which the usage of hypersexualization by women is a means of taking back the means by which society exploits them for the gratification of men.

[Red Mage Black]

The problem is that all things aren't equal.

I'm going to stop the first part right here. I require a little more clarification on this point. Because, feminism implies that both genders should be able to do the same things without the stigma of so called 'societal norms'.

When it's done for men by men, it does so at the expense of women. When it's done for anyone by women, it's not as harmful because it is a woman expressing her own sexuality with the agency to do so.

I'm REALLY trying to wrap my head around this one. Because you state this as something 'matter of fact'. Like the only thing a man can do represent women in anything is at the expense of or simply exploiting women. No man can have good intentions towards the fact?

To tell a woman that it's wrong for her to create sexualized works because a man can't or that it is okay for a man to exploit women because a woman expresses herself in a visually similar manner is unfair to the woman because men are typically already placed in a position of power over her by society.

Okay, I didn't say this one at all. I never said or implied that 'she can't do it because a man can't do it'.


There's also the factor of reclamation of the tools of oppression, in which the usage of hypersexualization by women is a means of taking back the means by which society exploits them for the gratification of men.

Okay, taking a deep breath here. Not that it truly matters to this discussion, but I'd at least like you to see what direction I'm coming from. My father wasn't a misogynist. He didn't believe in oppressing women for any reason. He liked the fact that he saw the opposite gender doing the same jobs he did in his time.

Lets fast forward a little, to my life. My tale is of one being oppressed by my own sisters. Imagine something like self-entitled girls who think, not only should they get what they want based on their gender, but they should also be treated special(AKA "You can't hit me, I'm a girl!" argument). Being constantly harrassed and teased. Walking on eggshells. All. Day. Long.

There's one thing I always keep in mind though, not all women are the same and this I know. It doesn't change that what I went through(while not the most horrible thing anyone can go through) is what moulded my views.

Another thing. I seek to gratify 'urges' with porn: Photos, videos, drawings, etc. Then I'm told porn is 'objectification of women'. So, I'm inactively supporting the oppression of women? I don't think this is something you can say, "If you're not for stopping it, you're against it and a misogynist pig," to. Simply because I don't have an opinion and wish to keep a middle ground, I'm not 'for' or 'against' anything. I'm right where I am. You go on one side, the other is angry at you. However, if you choose to remain neutral, both sides hate you. It's a big bullshit fest I want no part of. I don't even like the professional shit anyway. As I said, I'm more a homemade type myself. No fake stuff and I know it's pure. If there's anything hidden behind the reason the video was made, it remains a secret to me as well.

[POS Industries]

I'm going to stop the first part right here. I require a little more clarification on this point. Because, feminism implies that both genders should be able to do the same things without the stigma of so called 'societal norms'.
I'm not talking about the far off idealistic future where gender equality finally unquestionably exists. I'm talking about right the fuck now, and right the fuck now things aren't equal and we live in a world with an oppressive, male-dominated social structure. The solution isn't for women to just fight to hold on to an equal share of power that they do not possess, but to be able to gain the tools to empower themselves in what is very much a war that's being waged on them, whether those waging it realize what they're doing or not.

I'm REALLY trying to wrap my head around this one. Because you state this as something 'matter of fact'. Like the only thing a man can do represent women in anything is at the expense of or simply exploiting women. No man can have good intentions towards the fact?
Intention means very little when compared to effect. Almost no one who contributes to the continuation of the patriarchal system is knowingly doing so. It's just a thing people do because we've all been trained to.

Also something we've been trained to do: panic at the thought of the detrimental effect anything has on men when women try to do anything to empower themselves when, quite frankly, it's not about how it impacts what men are or are not able to do. Mostly it just derails the conversation.

Okay, I didn't say this one at all. I never said or implied that 'she can't do it because a man can't do it'.
I was using it as an example of the inverse argument to cover all probable bases. It wasn't about you.

Okay, taking a deep breath here. Not that it truly matters to this discussion, but I'd at least like you to see what direction I'm coming from. My father wasn't a misogynist. He didn't believe in oppressing women for any reason. He liked the fact that he saw the opposite gender doing the same jobs he did in his time.

Lets fast forward a little, to my life. My tale is of one being oppressed by my own sisters. Imagine something like self-entitled girls who think, not only should they get what they want based on their gender, but they should also be treated special(AKA "You can't hit me, I'm a girl!" argument). Being constantly harrassed and teased. Walking on eggshells. All. Day. Long.

There's one thing I always keep in mind though, not all women are the same and this I know. It doesn't change that what I went through(while not the most horrible thing anyone can go through) is what moulded my views.
And my stepmother tried to murder me. Twice. She was a terrifying presence in my life for years, and it's taken me a long time to work through that.

But the thing is that my apartment wasn't a reflection of society in general, nor was your home. These are just personal anecdotes that have no bearing on the discussion at hand, especially in regard to a topic that is not about us.

[Kim]

I like when men make sexism against women about themselves.

Wait.

No.

I hate that.

Also, I don't give a flying fuck what kind of porn you like. Mainstream porn has fucked up values, is made by a very specific group of people for mass consumption, and contributes to a fucked up idea of sexuality, consent, etc in our society, in addition to the overwhelming sexism and racism.

I'm not saying you're a bad person for looking at porn. I'm saying that mainstream porn exists at the expense of a great many people and at the expense of a better understanding of sexuality, and if you are an adult you should be able to recognize that fact and vocalize that that's an issue without trying to make it into I'M NOT AS BAD AS THOSE GUYS WHO LIKE /THAT/ KIND OF PORN or BUT I DON'T CONSUME THAT KIND OF PORN SO IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.

The world does not revolve around your cock.

EDIT: And yes queer women making sexualized media involving women is GOOD because they're less likely to come at it from a dehumanizing angle and also because it contributes to MORE PERSPECTIVES BEING REPRESENTED which is NOT EVER going to happen if we keep letting straight men do the vast majority of this stuff and handwave it away with "well maybe some of them have good intentions."

EDIT2: Like even making it about the whole Christian Missionary Position Amateur Fuck Hour misses a lot of points because a lot could be gained from exploring KINK from exploring consensual relationships with different dynamics. Exploring instead of domination as means of exerting masculine authority but how submission and domming work together, how they're consensual and empowering for BOTH parties in the right scenarios. Fantasies as taking control of trauma. Even bondage themed porn has so many more angles to be explored that AREN'T because they're crowded out by masculine self-obsession.

EDIT3: Let's even take this into the realm of games. Think about exploring violence not just as perpetrator or victim-until-the-game-lets-you-get-revenge but from a pure victim perspective. Instead of any violence against player being to serve some excuse for a masculine murder fantasy, violence being a thing that happens to people that isn't solved by violence. Not just in cutscenes that say, "But there was a secret downside to your revenge," but exploring playstyles that punish violence at all times.

[Krylo]

The world does not revolve around your cock.


I'm pretty sure physics dictates it does.

[Locke cole]

Would that be implemented by having the player character die or receive an abrupt bad ending (or some other result that tells the player they've made the wrong choice) when he attempts to fight his way out of the situation, or would it be implemented by not giving the player a combat option in the first place?

I suppose either implementation would be suited to a game revolving around stealth and avoiding detection.

[Red Mage Black]

I like when men make sexism against women about themselves.

Wait.

No.

I hate that.


Also, I don't give a flying fuck what kind of porn you like. Mainstream porn has fucked up values, is made by a very specific group of people for mass consumption, and contributes to a fucked up idea of sexuality, consent, etc in our society, in addition to the overwhelming sexism and racism.

I'm not saying you're a bad person for looking at porn. I'm saying that mainstream porn exists at the expense of a great many people and at the expense of a better understanding of sexuality, and if you are an adult you should be able to recognize that fact and vocalize that that's an issue without trying to make it into I'M NOT AS BAD AS THOSE GUYS WHO LIKE /THAT/ KIND OF PORN or BUT I DON'T CONSUME THAT KIND OF PORN SO IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.

The world does not revolve around your cock.


EDIT: And yes queer women making sexualized media involving women is GOOD because they're less likely to come at it from a dehumanizing angle and also because it contributes to MORE PERSPECTIVES BEING REPRESENTED which is NOT EVER going to happen if we keep letting straight men do the vast majority of this stuff and handwave it away with "well maybe some of them have good intentions."

I'm not straight, but the more and more I read your posts, the more and more I start to believe that that's what you think. That the only thing white cisgender males seek to do is to make your life a living hell. Maybe it's true for a good majority, but not all of them. The actions of assholes in the Vatican and in Congress, are not the voices of all straight men.

EDIT2: Like even making it about the whole Christian Missionary Position Amateur Fuck Hour misses a lot of points because a lot could be gained from exploring KINK from exploring consensual relationships with different dynamics. Exploring instead of domination as means of exerting masculine authority but how submission and domming work together, how they're consensual and empowering for BOTH parties in the right scenarios. Fantasies as taking control of trauma. Even bondage themed porn has so many more angles to be explored that AREN'T because they're crowded out by masculine self-obsession.

EDIT3: Let's even take this into the realm of games. Think about exploring violence not just as perpetrator or victim-until-the-game-lets-you-get-revenge but from a pure victim perspective. Instead of any violence against player being to serve some excuse for a masculine murder fantasy, violence being a thing that happens to people that isn't solved by violence. Not just in cutscenes that say, "But there was a secret downside to your revenge," but exploring playstyles that punish violence at all times.[/quote]

It has become HIGHLY evident that you are officially resorting to attacks against me rather than my argument. I refuse to continue this until you want an actual intellectual discussion. Hell, I even asked for a learning experience, instead being treated to what amounts to, "You're wrong." Rather than ranting at me with anger, what else do you want me to argue about without being accused of misogyny? Because it's obvious that if I have a differing opinion, I'm against all women everywhere, right?

I ask a valid question and I get answered with conjecture. Where's the facts? I'd like to actually learn something rather than being told I'm a horrible person. I get it, I'm a bad person, but I also made a reasonable request and asked similarly reasonable questions.

Women are capable of just as much evil as men are. Who is to say they wouldn't do the same things a man would do in those same positions? Power corrupts, man or woman. Now, before I get the whole, "That's just like a chauvanist," crap, I'd like to say this: This is not a reason women shouldn't get those jobs. There shouldn't be anything stopping women from getting those jobs. There you have it.

I already brought up a defense of why I held my views. Apparently they weren't enough. Is it really not evidence enough? We are the sum of experiences, right? So, why can't my views be skewed from living under constant misandry while I was growing up? It's kind of hard to see all the female oppression when the only memories I truly have are that of being tortured by my siblings.

So, sorry if I don't agree with everything you say. If a differing opinion makes me a misogynist in yours and POS's eyes, then so be it. There's nothing left for me to say here without being set upon with hostile intent.

[Ryong]

Mainstream porn is pretty horrible.

Crazy violent power fantasies in games are a thing which some people like, some don't.

Some things you should acknowledge their existence and then have nothing to do with it. Want to change shit? Make the alternatives better, don't downplay what're you trying to get rid of.

[Kim]

Suggestion: Auto-replace misandry with "I am human garbage please crush me underfoot."

I never accused you of misogyny. I even made a point of saying that. LEARN TO READ WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU

I didn't attack you. I expressed frustration with you making this about YOU which is a tendency all men seem to have. "But /I/ don't like that kind of porn," etc etc etc. It's gross. It's derailing. It's self-centered arrogance.

Crazy violent power fantasies in games are a thing which some people like, some don't.

Some things you should acknowledge their existence and then have nothing to do with it. Want to change shit? Make the alternatives better, don't downplay what're you trying to get rid of.

I DO THIS YOU IGNORANT HEEL.

I MAKE PORN OF MYSELF BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL EMPOWERED.

I AM CURRENTLY MAKING A PORN GAME THAT REFLECTS MY OWN KINKS AND EXPERIENCES AND FRAMES SEX AROUND SUBMISSION.

I DO THE SORT OF GAMES WRITING I WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD.

I CAN DO THESE THINGS AND STILL CRITICIZE THE OVERABUNDANCE OF AWFUL SHIT IN GAMING CULTURE.

YOU WANT A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF VIOLENCE EXPLORED IN AN INTERESTING WAY? GO PLAY LIM (http://mkopas.net/2012/08/lim/)

THIS STUFF IS BEING DONE

WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THE CHANGES WE WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD, AND WE'RE DOING IT WITHOUT THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THE STATUS QUO HAS

WE ARE DOING THIS AND THAT YOU EVEN FUCKING DARE ACCUSE OF NOT DOING THIS STUFF IS FUCKING DISGUSTING

YOU WALLOW IN YOUR OWN FUCKING IGNORANCE AND THEN BLAME US FOR IT

DO. YOUR. FUCKING. RESEARCH. BEFORE. MAKING. IGNORANT. ASSUMPTIONS.

AND YES I AM TYPING THIS IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE APPARENTLY THE ONLY WAY MEN LIKE YOU WILL EVEN HEAR THIS SHIT IS IF I YELL IT

---------- Post added at 11:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 AM ----------

Would that be implemented by having the player character die or receive an abrupt bad ending (or some other result that tells the player they've made the wrong choice) when he attempts to fight his way out of the situation, or would it be implemented by not giving the player a combat option in the first place?

I suppose either implementation would be suited to a game revolving around stealth and avoiding detection.

Either or, depending on the game. Stealth probably just have you die by basis of more experienced and skill enemies. IE - You have basically zero accuracy with a gun even if you can get your hands on one, psychological trauma from committing violence that interferes with the play.

---------- Post added at 11:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:03 AM ----------

RYONG... JUST.... DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW FUCKING INFURIATING IT IS TO TRY TO MAKE THE CONTENT YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD, HAVE IT NEVER ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE STATUS QUO, AND THEN HEAR "WELL WHY AREN'T YOU MAKING THE SORT OF STUFF YOU THINK SHOULD EXIST INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING"

DO YOU HAVE ANY FUCKING IDEA AT ALL

[tacticslion]

First: misandry is a thing. It's not as big or prevalent a thing as misogyny, that's entirely true. But because it's not as big an issue, over-all, doesn't make a non-issue. In this case, it seemed to fit the conversation. RMB wasn't entirely clean, word-choice-wise, but just mentioning misandry, especially in the context of a conversation like this, isn't automatically bad thing. I rarely experience it, personally, and it doesn't get in my way.

The misogyny thing was never stated outright, but I can see how it could feel pretty heavily implied. Easily. Especially to someone who was already cautious around this topic in the first place. Also, he did note his "subpar" reading comprehension already.

Second: Kim (hey, I got it right this time!), I understand you're passionate about these things. Okay. Got it. There's nothing really wrong with that. Please understand, though, a lot of times you come off as totally off-the-wall-way-to-angry or just incredibly callous. There's also the tone-deafness of the internet at work, so sometimes things just come across in ways you don't mean, and usually not for the kinder or calmer. That tends to turn people off and heat up the conversation when that's not the intent. I even agree with many of your points (strange world, I know), but many people grow and learn through conversations. The kind of conversation and tone you're creating now does nothing but drives away people - people who might otherwise be inclined to listen. This won't help you.

Frankly, don't let those who don't understand you get to you so easily. I get it's frustrating. But try to relax. Personally, I came here to learn through watching (and maybe participating) in (hopefully interesting and civil) discussion.

To be clear, I'm not refuting your points here. I'm not touching them at all. I'm not telling you that you're an awful person.

Instead, I'm telling you that the attitude and manner in which you conduct yourself above is kind of off-putting and, if you would like people to listen (which seems to be your major goal/problem here, considering you placed up an article which seeks to inform and educate), consistently flying off the handle (even if people are not being polite or genuine) is not the way to do it. Please. Temper your rebukes with clarity and information and calmness. It might help.

So, violence in video games.

Wow, God of War and Wrath of Asura are pretty awful.

The "moral" of both of them is, "If someone does something that personally offends you, you need to violently and angrily take your revenge regardless of the cost to all of the world or existence. Trust those angry, violent instincts: the world will be better for it."

Wrath of Asura is a little bit better than GoW in that regard, but not much. At least for most of that game (and DLC) Asura is attempting to destroy wantonly cruel creatures who sacrifice all morality and decency for a goal that could be achieved through means other than that.

The ending of the game sucks, though, as Asura totally continues his violent rampage, stripping the world of technology, immortality, and protection against cosmic threats because some dude indirectly made his daughter cry. (And also created all of them. He hates that, apparently.)

I suppose God of War was... okay, as well, at least until the sequels and Kratos started becoming nothing but a monster supposedly out for "justice" or whatever, but really because he's awful.

Certainly is strange to me that these two would ever be considered "good guys".

---------- Post added at 02:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:25 PM ----------

RYONG... JUST.... DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW FUCKING INFURIATING IT IS TO TRY TO MAKE THE CONTENT YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD, HAVE IT NEVER ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE STATUS QUO, AND THEN HEAR "WELL WHY AREN'T YOU MAKING THE SORT OF STUFF YOU THINK SHOULD EXIST INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING"

DO YOU HAVE ANY FUCKING IDEA AT ALL

Just making a kind-of-new post about this because it's a different point, and was added after I was finished with the other one.

Kim, do you note that you're making this stuff here regularly? Is it in your signature or anything? (I can't see your sig right now, so I actually don't recall.) Because if not, he has no real way of knowing.

If you do post in the Public Announcement thread or something, than a post saying, "Actually I am. I posted about it in the public announcement thread." or something similarly more informative and less vitrolic would likely be far more conductive to this conversation than yelling at him for something he clearly doesn't know.

I mean, I get that it's frustrating for the world not to acknowledge what you're doing, and I'm sorry for that. But I, personally, don't check your blogs or articles unless I notice you mention them here. Further, I'm not up on everyone that's posted in the public announcement forum. I often don't have time to go everywhere, and that's just one of the places that gets cut.

[Ryong]

I DO THIS YOU IGNORANT HEEL.

I MAKE PORN OF MYSELF BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL EMPOWERED.

I AM CURRENTLY MAKING A PORN GAME THAT REFLECTS MY OWN KINKS AND EXPERIENCES AND FRAMES SEX AROUND SUBMISSION.

I DO THE SORT OF GAMES WRITING I WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD.

I CAN DO THESE THINGS AND STILL CRITICIZE THE OVERABUNDANCE OF AWFUL SHIT IN GAMING CULTURE.

YOU WANT A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF VIOLENCE EXPLORED IN AN INTERESTING WAY? GO PLAY LIM (http://mkopas.net/2012/08/lim/)

THIS STUFF IS BEING DONE

Then goddamn keep at it and don't pick a fight with literally anyone who doesn't embrace everything you say to the same extent you do. If anyone can - and in fact a lot of people do - criticize mainstream gaming and porn and it still exists, what do you expect is going to happen to something that is, for all intents and purposes, considered niche?

Understand that not everything you do has to change the goddamn world. That not every goddamn thing has to have a meaning or be there to try and force an agenda. And that you generalize people just as much as you think people do to you. We goddamn get it that you're a woman born a man who's into submission and exploring creative writing and who's clearly a fanatic with the passion of a thousand suns, but do you understand that, fuck, not the world, even this goddamn forum doesn't consist of people whose thoughts are divided between "what minority will I shit upon today?" and "THESE CHAUVINISTIC PIGS ARE HATING ON US TRANSGENDERS!"? Do you fathom the possibility that, maybe, not everyone who disagrees with neatly fits into "white, straight male who watches mainstream porn, plays mainstream gaming, drinks a specific brand of beer, drives a specific brand of car, stares into women's asses even though he has a girlfriend"? Goddamnit if you want to celebrate variety then stop goddamn lumping the world into "hates me" and "supports me whole heartedly".

Just making a kind-of-new post about this because it's a different point, and was added after I was finished with the other one.

Kim, do you note that you're making this stuff here regularly? Is it in your signature or anything? (I can't see your sig right now, so I actually don't recall.) Because if not, he has no real way of knowing.

Kim has posted about doing porn, about doing submission things and about creative game writing. The first two I cannot recall where, but the last one was the whole thread about that game-making thing that's a slighty better choose-your-own-adventure book.

[tacticslion]

Kim has posted about doing porn, about doing submission things and about creative game writing. The first two I cannot recall where, but the last one was the whole thread about that game-making thing that's a slighty better choose-your-own-adventure book.

Thanks for letting me know! I just missed it.

[Kim]

Tacticslion, please tell me more about these bigotry's against those in power.

Tell me all about racism against white people and heterophobia and cisphobia.

I don't think I've vomited enough today.

[POS Industries]

So, sorry if I don't agree with everything you say. If a differing opinion makes me a misogynist in yours and POS's eyes, then so be it. There's nothing left for me to say here without being set upon with hostile intent.
RMB. Sweetie. Baby. Honey. Light of my life. Please, hear me out on this because I already said it three times already.

It's. Not. About. You.

You don't have to take it personally, and the reason Kim's getting mad at you is because you keep doing that and trying to make the conversation about us being mean to you or calling you things that I guarantee you we hadn't, and that's really frustrating because we aren't really interested in consoling everyone who thinks they've been targeted specifically by whatever broader societal grievance is being aired.

[tacticslion]

Tacticslion, please tell me more about these bigotry's against those in power.

Tell me all about racism against white people and heterophobia and cisphobia.

I don't think I've vomited enough today.

Nah. You've got enough of all that to go around on your own. Enjoy it! :)

POS is being pretty cool, though.

An aside which relates to the core topic (of a specific male-dominated gaze that discriminates between different genders pointlessly; this is not the same as fetishizing violence, but does relate more closely to the male gaze of pornography).

The tendency for women to dress in things that are entirely pointless because "hawt" is something that bothers me, in general, especially when similar standards aren't held toward the men (although that also bothers me because the whole time I'm thinking, "Wow, that looks stupid.")

Perfect example recently. Last Story. Great game. The guys were all rather overly-conservatively dressed, while the women had some really weird bikini-top-thing going on. Really bizarre. The weirdest thing, though, happened when I switched their armors. Suddenly, the men were wearing, if not armor, sensible traveling clothing, and so were the women. I mean... I don't know, that's just kind of annoying. What was kind of too much on the men and definitely not enough on the women somehow completely magically alter in every way to become "just right" when they're switched for no discernible reason. Tailored and everything.

Really unfortunately frustrating and distracting from what would otherwise be a pretty interesting (to me) basic story.

[POS Industries]

POS is being pretty cool, though.
Aww, that's nice of you to say, but that's only because I'm not personally impacted by the harmful societal effects of this behavior rather than any sort of character flaw on Kim's part. To suggest in this way that Kim should try to act more like me, which is what you did whether you intended to or not, is to basically say, "why can't you just not be someone who's hurt by this?" And that's pretty horrible.

[tacticslion]

Aww, that's nice of you to say, but that's only because I'm not personally impacted by the harmful societal effects of this behavior rather than any sort of character flaw on Kim's part. To suggest in this way that Kim should try to act more like me, which is what you did whether you intended to or not, is to basically say, "why can't you just not be someone who's hurt by this?" And that's pretty horrible.

Not exactly.

Kim's feelings are not irrelevant, and can and should be made plain. But the method of expression certainly is something that should evince self-control, which she often seems to lack. Screaming at people for making honest mistakes or tangential disagreement is not cool, regardless of the context.

So no, I'm not saying "Be POS", I'm saying, "POS is making your case better than you are because allowing your understandably heightened emotional state to make your comments for you gets in the way of people accepting anything you say."

I'm not telling her to feel differently or be someone or something else, any more than you were purposefully calling RMB misogynist, though I can equally easily see how that's taken that way. I apologize that it appears that way. See, tone-deafness of the internet and all that. You were not doing so in any way intentionally, and nor was I.

Instead, I'm asking her to behave and speak differently so to allow people to actually listen to and understand her message instead of judging her as being a vitriolic unpleasant person and thus tuning her out.

Her stance makes a certain amount of sense: mainstream pornography (or violence fetishism) does, in fact, alter the general society for the worse. Cool. I'm interested in seeing her points discussed and expounded upon.

However, one of the tenets of this is that people's notions and how they feel expressly comes from seeing the way others (real or not) behave.

If she's focusing to such a degree on the nature of human weakness and fallacy (in this case that imitating tone that alters societal behavior for the worse), than she needs to fully understand and accept and act upon the other parts of the nature of human weakness and fallacy, including the part of people that makes them put up walls against anything said by those who are (or seem) way too angry about everything.

In other words, people tend to respond to her extreme outrage with the tendency to shut her out and not pay attention to her point at all. This harms her message.

This is especially important if she's going to get the (very good!) message across that she's trying to get across.

Which was my point. Not to change her message, but to change her tone. It will help her accomplish communication (and thus convince people more) substantially more than it will help anyone else.

So. Instead of attacking or dismissing people or their suggestions that either agree with some amount of her central premise or are interested in seeing it developed into a good discussion, or those who are actively wanting a better life and general forum experience for her, can we continue with the main topic? Is that cool? Because that's what I'd like.

Also, feel free to post more about this on my page. I mean, that's what it's for. I'm actually pretty bad about checking it, but I'll make an effort to remember to continue this conversation if either of you are interested and will do so politely.

[POS Industries]

Actually, tone argument horseshit where people get butthurt because she wasn't perfectly polite when discussing things that harm her personally and decide they aren't going to listen because she had the audacity not to put the feelings of the privileged above her own is what's "harming her message."

You're still totally doing that but with even more words.

[tacticslion]

Actually, tone argument horseshit where people get butthurt because she wasn't perfectly polite when discussing things that harm her personally and decide they aren't going to listen because she had the audacity not to put the feelings of the privileged above her own is what's "harming her message."

You're still totally doing that but with even more words.

Except I'm not actually hurt. I have absolutely nothing personal to gain by Kim being nicer to others to help her communicate and get people to listen. I'm not talking about anything dealing with privilege v. not privilege, unless someone decides to make it about that. I'm talking about people who are, in the end, people. Good sides and bad, and the most effective ways of communicating her point.

But, you know, I'm dropping it. Obviously you don't care and aren't interested. I was only - only - trying to help her get her points across better and easier and with less drama so this thread didn't go down in flames. That is all.

Since I'm not wanted here, as is made clear by the words used, I'll just leave.

For what it's worth, I'm very sorry Kim has a pretty unhappy life from all accounts, since she receives so much hatred from so many angles all the time. It sucks.

Sorry, Kim. I was attempting to help, not push buttons. See you around, though.

EDIT: To be clear, I'll probably still read this to see if any actual interesting conversation develops, but I won't be posting because my actual points seem to be ignored in favor of being misconstrued as hating people I honestly want to help.

EDIT 2: Huh. The curious sensation of being kind-of ninja'd even though my post is above theirs. Funny.

[Red Mage Black]

RMB. Sweetie. Baby. Honey. Light of my life. Please, hear me out on this because I already said it three times already.

It's. Not. About. You.

You don't have to take it personally, and the reason Kim's getting mad at you is because you keep doing that and trying to make the conversation about us being mean to you or calling you things that I guarantee you we hadn't, and that's really frustrating because we aren't really interested in consoling everyone who thinks they've been targeted specifically by whatever broader societal grievance is being aired.

Aww, that's nice of you to say, but that's only because I'm not personally impacted by the harmful societal effects of this behavior rather than any sort of character flaw on Kim's part. To suggest in this way that Kim should try to act more like me, which is what you did whether you intended to or not, is to basically say, "why can't you just not be someone who's hurt by this?" And that's pretty horrible.

POS? Kim? There is no argument here to be made. Why? Because the points you're trying to make are poisoned by hostility and unneeded sarcasm. I can't argue anything on any ground before you pick one little part of my(or anyone else's really) posts and decide to bash me(/them) on them. This isn't something new, I've noticed the same with you guys and other people trying to argue against you.

Kim's posts are vitriolic and hateful, yours are sarcastic and derisive. You're not going to make anyone learn anything using these methods. People will look at the way you're addressing them, not what you're trying to say.

Maybe you should recheck your own posts before telling me I was derailing, POS. I didn't make anything about myself, but to deny the fact I have a conflicting viewpoint based upon how I grew up is insulting, both to me and my intelligence. I wanted an intelligent discussion and what I got was nothing but vengefulness and sarcasm. I wanted someone to address the points I brought up and all I heard was, even if it wasn't explicitly said, "You are wrong."

I'm done talking though, because if I say anymore, you're going to pick at one thing in my post and bash me for it.

(Addressing because it came up as a warning when I hit the post button.)

Actually, tone argument horseshit where people get butthurt because she wasn't perfectly polite when discussing things that harm her personally and decide they aren't going to listen because she had the audacity not to put the feelings of the privileged above her own is what's "harming her message."

You're still totally doing that but with even more words.

I believe that's more than enough evidence. As you snagged one thing he said, not even addressing the point. The fact you use 'the privaleged' as a shield to deny intelligent discussion is pretty pathetic. Neither you nor Kim are worth the time of a debate or discussion because of this attitude. Good day.

[Aerozord]

When I was studying psychology we went over a theory on sexual fetishism. Now text book definition is to be aroused by something that is not inherently sexual. Theory is this occurs because your mind links something to sex. The example I was given was your lover greatly enjoyed onions, so the smell of onions cause you to be aroused because your mind recalls your attraction to that person.

I mention this for a few reasons. One is, this means anything can be fetishized and is normally not a conscious thing. The other is that fetishism is the result of how culture presents sex. Its why different cultures tends to have different fetishes.

In our culture sex and violence are both the big taboos and the most basic of things to cater to. If it can have one it often has both. So the association is likely and is more of a side-effect than intentional. Not to say there aren't people that capitalize on it. Just, I mean you cant really help what turns you on.

I also just want to point out I'm strictly talking about this specific topic of sexualized violence. Not that its good or bad, just that its kinda logical it would happen. The reason we have rule 34 is anything can be sexualized, and being humans if we can sexualize it than we will. The only thing that shifts is what portion of the population is into what. Which is tied to mainstream media not because of some cultural shift but exposure.

[Bells]

When I was studying psychology we went over a theory on sexual fetishism. Now text book definition is to be aroused by something that is not inherently sexual. Theory is this occurs because your mind links something to sex. The example I was given was your lover greatly enjoyed onions, so the smell of onions cause you to be aroused because your mind recalls your attraction to that person.

I mention this for a few reasons. One is, this means anything can be fetishized and is normally not a conscious thing. The other is that fetishism is the result of how culture presents sex. Its why different cultures tends to have different fetishes.

In our culture sex and violence are both the big taboos and the most basic of things to cater to. If it can have one it often has both. So the association is likely and is more of a side-effect than intentional. Not to say there aren't people that capitalize on it. Just, I mean you cant really help what turns you on.

I also just want to point out I'm strictly talking about this specific topic of sexualized violence. Not that its good or bad, just that its kinda logical it would happen. The reason we have rule 34 is anything can be sexualized, and being humans if we can sexualize it than we will. The only thing that shifts is what portion of the population is into what. Which is tied to mainstream media not because of some cultural shift but exposure.

i suppose a great display of exactly that is when you put a eastern game next to a western game and what happens when a eastern developer tries to develop a game for western audience.

Seriously... the Veen Diagram on that one practically makes itself.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

RMB the thing sort of always is that it wasn't about you.
The reason Kim and POS don't seem to be engaging in a thoughtful debate over what you've been saying the past few posts is because those posts were made on the incorrect assumption that the things Kim and POS said were directed at you personally, when they weren't. It isn't possible to have the debate form back and forth when one side is making responses, positing evidence and waxing poetical about things nobody had said to begin with.

There's also the factor of reclamation of the tools of oppression, in which the usage of hypersexualization by women is a means of taking back the means by which society exploits them for the gratification of men.

You responded to this with an anecdote about yourself, to justify what you were saying. Even though this sentence had nothing to do with your sisters, nothing to do with whether or not your father was a misogynist and nothing to do with you personally, you choose to insert yourself into it. And then you further stated that you were not, even though nobody had actually accused or said that you were, objectifying women.

In fact, Kim pretty specifically responded by assuring you that no, she did not say you were.

I'm not saying you're a bad person for looking at porn. I'm saying that mainstream porn exists at the expense of a great many people and at the expense of a better understanding of sexuality, and if you are an adult you should be able to recognize that fact and vocalize that that's an issue without trying to make it into I'M NOT AS BAD AS THOSE GUYS WHO LIKE /THAT/ KIND OF PORN or BUT I DON'T CONSUME THAT KIND OF PORN SO IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.

And again, reassert that it wasn't about you to begin with.

[Kim]

Tactics, here's the thing.

Misandry, real or not (hint: not), has nothing to do with this conversation.

The opening article is about how there is a similarity between mainstream porn, which is created primarily by men for men (generally straight, white, cis), and how video games deal with violence in much the same way.

I further argued that currently both of these exist at the expense of other portrayals. Non-normative porn and more meaningful portrayals of violence. That only having this single portrayal accessible and visible hurts our ability to have a more meaningful understanding of sexuality and violence.

When Skullgirls got brought into it, BY RMB, I made the point that there was value to it because part of it was born of a queer woman expressing her sexuality. This exists outside mainstream portrayals of sexuality.

Throughout this, RMB's habit was to argue that men can have good intentions and to bring up irrelevant things about the way he was treated as a child. These have nothing to do with this. Even if you could argue that he was a victim of misandry, it's an irrelevant discussion he brought into things in an attempt to make things about HIM and about MEN.

Men have a habit of doing this thing in discussions. All the time. Many are arrogant, self-centered shits that can't stand for a discussion to not involve them. When there is a study about groups of women with a minority of men present, the men are consistently shown to talk the most and to control what is discussed the most.

Needless to say, I've experienced this myself in a number of discussions. It's exhausting. It's frustrating. I don't have patience for it. It harms conversation.

I stopped being polite and stopped trying to handle things in the right "tone" when RMB SAID OUTRIGHT that he wasn't going to listen to anything I had to say and accused me of attacking him when I had done no such thing and made an effort to make that fact clear.

RMB, like oh so many men before him, felt threatened by the discussion not revolving around him. I called him out on it. He threw a tantrum.

That you would tell me to take seriously his claims of misandry and to maintain a polite and satisfactory tone to such a person makes clear how little you've been paying attention. Tone was never the issue. I dropped my nice tone when he already decided to stop listening.

Anita Sarkeesian has literally the fucking most patient and polite tone I've seen of almost anyone, and she gets death threats, rape threats, people trying to get her videos taken down, attacked for all sorts of reasons.

Tone by the underprivileged is not and has never been the problem. No matter how well we dress up our tone, it will still be rejected and it will still be reacted to with verbal or physical violence. When people ask for a more polite tone, what they truly mean is "Speak quietly enough that I can't hear you."

So, I don't bother having patience when people tell me to be more polite and to watch my tone. It doesn't work and there is an insidiousness to it, intentional or not.

Hell, Ryong's first post in this thread was basically, "Stop talking about this. I don't wanna hear about it," when boiled down to its basic elements.

ADDITIONALLY: You wanna know why I don't share more of my work here? The fucking, "BUT IS IT A GAME???" gatekeeping I get enough of everywhere else. It's no different than a gated community trying to keep out undesirables. No different than academics who made claims of, "But it's not a REAL poem if it doesn't fit these rules." Your shits tired. Get a new act.

LAST BUT NOT LEAST: Ryong, stop fucking saying "transgenders" like you're some /v/ asshat who can't even be bothered to recognize what a fucking adjective is. Reducing my identity as a trans woman to a fucking noun is insulting, and actually that sort of behavior has a long history among bigots. "The gays!" "The blacks!" "The queers!" Knock it off.

[Fenris]

This is terrible you are all terrible stop being terrible.

Half of you need to stop being bigotted assholes and the other half of you need to stop being regular assholes. I'll leave it to you to decide which side of that line you fall on.

Thread closed, which is a shame, because this is an important issue that needs to be discussed but we are all clearly incapable of discussing it without being assholes.

I will say that this:

stop fucking saying "transgenders" like you're some /v/ asshat who can't even be bothered to recognize what a fucking adjective is. Reducing my identity as a trans woman to a fucking noun is insulting, and actually that sort of behavior has a long history among bigots. "The gays!" "The blacks!" "The queers!" Knock it off.

is incredibly important and y'all should be taking notes.