News Stories

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Solace

It's misogyny because of the double standard, which is what Vallen and Ahn understood as my point. No one jokes about Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne being a playboy, but Black Widow is "jokingly" referred to as a slut and a whore because of her relationships? Does this not seem like an incredibly stupid thing to say or joke about, when it's not even true at all?

No one? you sure? See, this is what I mean when it comes to perspective. They joked about it because of the question that was brought up. Was the question about Iron Man? or Batman? It may be double standard if they were asked the same question about Iron Man/Batman and didn't make the same jokes, but crying double standard when they weren't simply doesn't work logically on any level.

It'd be like if person A made a joke about American cars being crap when asked about the performance of American sports cars, and someone cries foul about double standard because person A didn't also joke that Japanese cars are crap too.

How about it's because nobody had said anything about Japanese cars in the first place?

Yeah, it's a fictional character, but it's still a stupid comment and it should be called out for what it is. As I said, shit like this is so deeply rooted in society that no one really stops to think about what it really means to say things like that.

A slut implies a woman who will sleep around with anyone, an easy lay. A whore implies a woman who will sleep with anyone if they pay her enough.

It's telling enough that there really isn't a male word for these concepts. It's telling enough that people consider those words casual enough to use as a joke.

I'm not arguing that there's no sexism, what I'm arguing against is throwing the misogyny label at everything.

I know how the outrage machine works, and yeah, I won't deny that people go overboard over things that aren't really a huge deal, but at the root of many of those outrages is something that really is an issue and it is enough of a thing to make people want to talk about it.

Two wrongs doesn't make a right. And let's not be disingenuous here, when the outrage machine is in operation, it's about as close to "wanting to talk about it" as a thermonuclear explosion is to a firecracker.

Using your armor complaint thread as an example, maybe that particular armor isn't that bad (I have no idea since I don't play FF14), but RPG armor is infamous for giving men practical armor and giving women sexy armor. Heck this is extremely common even in anime. In the end, creators can make whatever they want. Is it misogyny? It's not intended to be offensive, but it is a result of a society where fictional characters in many instances are designed mainly for men.

See where I said about two wrongs don't make a right? Why does FF14 have to bear the cross for the offenses of other games? And I find the entire line of reasoning to be ignorant at best. Game devs aren't government agencies, they are no different than any other enterprises that create products to sell to generate profit. They tailor the design of their products to maximizes their profit, whether that be skimpy female armor or brain-dead aim assist mechanics.

It's no different than a car company tailoring the design of their cars to the performance/cost/environmental-concerned crowd. That game designs caters primarily to heterosexual male today is because that remains their primary customer base. As you say, nothing exists in a vacuum, you want a certain type of products? then you need to have the market for said product.

To not recognize that, and not see why people argue about it and try to discover some new "happy middle ground" between genders, is more lacking in perspective than some idiot feminist or men's rights activist tossing around buzzwords and finding something new to be offended about every day.

Trust me, I get as tired of that schtick as you do. But I'm not going to pretend that there isn't something to it, either. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

Yea, or you can try to not put words in my mouth. I recognize things just fine, I just don't subscribe to the crusader mentality that some people defaults to.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

I get it (except the bit about FF14, because like Solace I don't play it). But at the same time, I'm also irked by the "it's just a joke" excuse. It's not about the joke. It's never just about the joke.


Here (point #1):


Different "joke" here, but similar, related problem.

I understand the sentiment, but it is not something that I can agree with on a fundamental level. You simply can't just take something and cram it down whatever social/cultural narrative you want. By the logic in that article, what really matters is not the individual action, but rather where it fits in an equation.

It's not ok to make jokes about women - it's misogynistic because women suffers more discrimination in society, thereby implying it's perfectly fine to do it to men. By that logic, would it then be ok to joke about women if the subject is about child custody?

It's not ok to make black jokes because of the discrimination against blacks in America - so it is ok to make Asian jokes? or Irish? And does that change depending on where you are at? Would it be ok to make black jokes in Africa? or Asian jokes in Asia? or is it still not ok because somewhere on this planet someone in those group are still being discriminated against?

Once you start going down that road, you quickly find that nothing is ever ok, because somebody somewhere will take offense because the butt of the joke is discriminated against somewhere, and the only thing that will ever matter is the flavor of political correctness of the month

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by kyp275

I understand the sentiment, but it is not something that I can agree with on a fundamental level. You simply can't just take something and cram it down whatever social/cultural narrative you want. By the logic in that article, what really matters is not the individual action, but rather where it fits in an equation.

Yep. Context, context, context.

It's not ok to make jokes about women - it's misogynistic because women suffers more discrimination in society, thereby implying it's perfectly fine to do it to men. By that logic, would it then be ok to joke about women if the subject is about child custody?

It's not ok to make black jokes because of the discrimination against blacks in America - so it is ok to make Asian jokes? or Irish? And does that change depending on where you are at? Would it be ok to make black jokes in Africa? or Asian jokes in Asia? or is it still not ok because somewhere on this planet someone in those group are still being discriminated against?

And the answer is, of course, "it depends".

One rule of comedy I read about (which of course isn't sufficient to really judge, but is still a good guideline) is "don't punch down". Mocking the rich for driving gold plated cars? Knock yourself out. Mocking hobos for living in cardboard houses? Not cool.

Once you start going down that road, you quickly find that nothing is ever ok, because somebody somewhere will take offense because the butt of the joke is discriminated against somewhere, and the only thing that will ever matter is the flavor of political correctness of the month

And you fall into the very trap the article warned about: you make it about feelings.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

One rule of comedy I read about (which of course isn't sufficient to really judge, but is still a good guideline) is "don't punch down". Mocking the rich for driving gold plated cars? Knock yourself out. Mocking hobos for living in cardboard houses? Not cool.

Incidentally, I recently read someone comment about that, saying how that rule is in fact discriminatory, because "punching down" implies that the poor and disenfranchised are of lower worth and status than the rich/advantaged crowd.

And the answer is, of course, "it depends".

My observation is that for certain groups of people context doesn't matter.

And you fall into the very trap the article warned about: you make it about feelings.

I disagree. The things I argue against isn't so much about how I feel on that particular subject, but rather the principle and the implication behind the action of those I'm arguing against.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Incidentally, I recently read someone comment about that, saying how that rule is in fact discriminatory, because "punching down" implies that the poor and disenfranchised are of lower worth and status than the rich/advantaged crowd.

I don't know about "worth", but it's a fact of life the rich and powerful have more money and power (and status) than the poor.

My observation is that for certain groups of people context doesn't matter.

And that makes it alright to ignore the issues altogether?

I disagree. The things I argue against isn't so much about how I feel on that particular subject,

Who said anything about your feelings?

but rather the principle and the implication behind the action of those I'm arguing against.

Which are?

[maplehurry]

Originally Posted by kyp275

It's not ok to make jokes about women - it's misogynistic because women suffers more discrimination in society, thereby implying it's perfectly fine to do it to men. By that logic, would it then be ok to joke about women if the subject is about child custody?

It's not ok to make black jokes because of the discrimination against blacks in America - so it is ok to make Asian jokes? or Irish? And does that change depending on where you are at? Would it be ok to make black jokes in Africa? or Asian jokes in Asia? or is it still not ok because somewhere on this planet someone in those group are still being discriminated against?

Simple solution: make jokes about "everyone" so people can't accuse you of discrimination.

But isn't this mostly only a concern for public figure ?

If I make a joke without malicious intent, I don't really care if some strangers on Internet insist on calling me a racist or whatever...

Incidentally, I recently read someone comment about that, saying how that rule is in fact discriminatory, because "punching down" implies that the poor and disenfranchised are of lower worth and status than the rich/advantaged crowd.

That depends on whether some hobo chose to be a hobo by choice (like *that guy* from TTGL). Some poor are ashamed of themselves being poor, others don't.

[AnimeFan188]

Nepal quake: Nearly 1,400 dead, Everest shaken:

"Tens of thousands of people were spending the night in the open under a chilly and
thunderous sky after a powerful earthquake devastated Nepal on Saturday, killing
nearly 1,400, collapsing modern houses and ancient temples and triggering a
landslide on Mount Everest. Officials warned the death toll would rise as more
reports came in from far-flung areas."

See:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...04-25-17-35-17

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

I don't know about "worth", but it's a fact of life the rich and powerful have more money and power (and status) than the poor.

....you missed my point, which isn't to say that there's no difference between rich and poor, but that for some people even the words used to describe said difference can be labeled as discriminatory.

And that makes it alright to ignore the issues altogether?

Read above.

Who said anything about your feelings?

You did, and I quote: "And you fall into the very trap the article warned about: you make it about feelings. ".

Which are?

ultra-political correctness, exaggerated labeling that cheapens the meaning of the word, seeing ghosts everywhere, should I go on?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by kyp275

....you missed my point, which isn't to say that there's no difference between rich and poor, but that for some people even the words used to describe said difference can be labeled as discriminatory.

Ah. Your "some people" again. Very convenient, isn't it?

Read above.

What about it?

You did, and I quote: "And you fall into the very trap the article warned about: you make it about feelings. ".

But it's not your feelings I was talking about. As the article said, "some people" (wow, it really is convenient) like to say "political correctness", and all that goes with it, is about feelings. That the problem with offensive jokes is that, aha, they offend a small (or even not so small, doesn't matter) number of very vocal people. And that there is, therefore, no problem, because who cares about feelings?

ultra-political correctness, exaggerated labeling that cheapens the meaning of the word, seeing ghosts everywhere, should I go on?

I won't deny that "some people" carry it too far. But again, that fact doesn't mean we get to be complete dicks. Like you said, two wrongs don't make a right.

[Solace]

Originally Posted by kyp275

No one? you sure? See, this is what I mean when it comes to perspective. They joked about it because of the question that was brought up. Was the question about Iron Man? or Batman? It may be double standard if they were asked the same question about Iron Man/Batman and didn't make the same jokes, but crying double standard when they weren't simply doesn't work logically on any level.

Yeah, I'm sure. Did you actually read the thread you linked? It opens with "just for fun" and quickly enters into a discussion about the meaning of "slut" and "whore" and if those monikers actually apply to the characters being listed.

In addition, it's far easier to have such open discussions among a group of like minded individuals. It's not any different than the discussions you see here. That's far different than joking about it during a public interview to people who probably won't "get it". It's called knowing your audience.

It'd be like if person A made a joke about American cars being crap when asked about the performance of American sports cars, and someone cries foul about double standard because person A didn't also joke that Japanese cars are crap too.

How about it's because nobody had said anything about Japanese cars in the first place?

The double standard is implied because the joke is about American cars being crap. So does that mean all non-American cars are better? I can see someone thinking "hey, I wonder what he thinks about <insert nation>'s cars if he thinks American ones are crap?"

Of course, maybe that person would be reading into the joke too much, right? A joke might just be a joke, meant for the cheap laugh and not anything deep? That's fair but then again, it is just a car. Telling a black man a racist joke about blacks is different from telling Ford a joke about how they make shitty Mustangs. Well, perhaps both might involve police afterwards. But one will linger and do more damage than the other, I think.

I'm not arguing that there's no sexism, what I'm arguing against is throwing the misogyny label at everything.

Sure, that's fair. But in this case what they said was a reflection of misogyny in culture. Slut and whore are strong words, and they should be used carefully. That's why I said "Many people who partake in it, don't even realize it."

Like the person in Ahn's quote pointed out, it's not this one particular instance that is the problem, but that it is reflective of an issue of a whole. Constant open use of derogatory words and innuendo, even in jest, can shape how people talk to and treat each other.

Two wrongs doesn't make a right. And let's not be disingenuous here, when the outrage machine is in operation, it's about as close to "wanting to talk about it" as a thermonuclear explosion is to a firecracker.

That still doesn't mean there isn't something to the outrage. I'm interested in root causes of problems. There's something to be learned in every instance, including freakouts.

See where I said about two wrongs don't make a right? Why does FF14 have to bear the cross for the offenses of other games? And I find the entire line of reasoning to be ignorant at best. Game devs aren't government agencies, they are no different than any other enterprises that create products to sell to generate profit. They tailor the design of their products to maximizes their profit, whether that be skimpy female armor or brain-dead aim assist mechanics.

It's no different than a car company tailoring the design of their cars to the performance/cost/environmental-concerned crowd. That game designs caters primarily to heterosexual male today is because that remains their primary customer base. As you say, nothing exists in a vacuum, you want a certain type of products? then you need to have the market for said product.

Have you ever considered that markets can be created and shaped? Ask yourself, did the preteen market exist before the 1990's? Remember how suddenly you starting hearing about stuff like "tweens"? Companies realized the children of the 80's and 90's had a lot of "parent money" that could be tapped into, so they tried creating a demographic no one had ever heard of. Today it's an industry worth billions. How about sports drinks? Do people really need them? Not really, but those commercials do a great job of convincing people otherwise. Marketing is really good at getting people to the point where they'll happily parrot and defend the "virtues" of brands and products blindly, even if it harms them.

Creating markets from nothing, shaping existing markets, using marketing to make people think, believe, and want whatever you're selling....there's a reason that marketing and propaganda are closely related.

FF14 bears a cross because they chose to be like everyone else at a time when people are being vocal about wanting something different. That's a criticism, not a crucifixion. There is a market demand for female armor that doesn't look like it is being sold to horny males. But if you can continue to make a healthy profit from pandering to those horny males, why take the risk? It's a catch 22.

Yea, or you can try to not put words in my mouth. I recognize things just fine, I just don't subscribe to the crusader mentality that some people defaults to.

Let's clear up some confusion here. I didn't put words in your mouth. My line was directed at this, which you said:

Perspective is something that seems to have become a lost art. A small difference in a piece of armor makes the game sexist, a crude joke against a fictional female character is now misogyny (but somehow totally ok if it's directed at a man). I simply cannot imagine what goes on in the minds of people like that, I would be too busy being offended by everything to actually have a life.

Yeah, I used the misogyny label, which is why you felt compelled to reply to me in the first place. So was this part directed, at least in part, to me?

I would hope that by now you have noticed that I'm a pretty leveled headed, even handed type of person. I'm not big on crusading or tossing buzzwords out just for the sake of it. I'm not big on being part of any outrage machine. While I would say I'm a feminist, I'm an old school one. A lot of this modern internet social justice activism irritates me, to say the least. A lot of it is exploited for agendas and profit (like clickbait articles). Sexism exists on both sides of the gender divide, and I don't believe "men" are the sole problem many vocal internet "feminists" claim them to be.

Just because I commented on this news piece about how it reflects ingrained social gender issues does not mean that I don't also recognize how men are affected by it as well. If there's one thing in all discussions that I try to hold on to, it's perspective. Probably to the point of being overly pragmatic at times, but that's just who I am.

But when it comes to something like this news piece, yeah, I'll call a spade a spade. The actors could have refused to answer the question, or chose better words to describe their opinions. These types of questions and their responses don't come up in many interviews, which is why this particular instance makes headlines. But hey, we're all guilty of saying something stupid once in a while, right? I'm not out for their heads. I'm sure they're good men who treat women great.

It's already blown over, and I'm sure the movie won't be harmed by it, nor the actors careers. But as a curious instance of a moment in time, there's something to be considered and said about how the answers those actors gave even comes up in the first place and how that reflects on our culture as a whole.

[Eisdrache]

Despite not coming up with any news, I'm far more interested in actual news stories than another argument about misogyny.

[maplehurry]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

Despite not coming up with any news, I'm far more interested in actual news stories than another argument about misogyny.

Today is the 75 years anniversary of women's right to vote in Québec.

So show some respect and deal with it for today.

[Jagger]

Ah the silly slut stigma. It makes women feel uncomfortable about sex and achieves nothing but cock block both sexes. The word slut has no meaning to me. I think women should feel free to sample men to their hearts' content, the world is your buffet. And the people who think otherwise with their little boring, outdated ways of thinking can fuck right off.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Ah. Your "some people" again. Very convenient, isn't it?

Convenient? I'm taking this as a not-so-thinly-veiled insinuation that I'm just making shit up.

Feel free to take a look yourself.

But it's not your feelings I was talking about. As the article said, "some people" (wow, it really is convenient) like to say "political correctness", and all that goes with it, is about feelings. That the problem with offensive jokes is that, aha, they offend a small (or even not so small, doesn't matter) number of very vocal people. And that there is, therefore, no problem, because who cares about feelings?

...you're not even making sense anymore. I'm not the one saying that everything need to be political correct, you are.

I won't deny that "some people" carry it too far. But again, that fact doesn't mean we get to be complete dicks. Like you said, two wrongs don't make a right.

And there's the problem I see so often, where people twists what other people actually said.

What I said was that the jokes, while tasteless, does not rise to the level of misogyny, since when did that become "everyone should be complete dicks!"?

Originally Posted by Solace

Yeah, I'm sure. Did you actually read the thread you linked? It opens with "just for fun" and quickly enters into a discussion about the meaning of "slut" and "whore" and if those monikers actually apply to the characters being listed.

I fail to see the relevance there. You said no one ever jokes about it, a quick search turned up stuff that says otherwise. Would slut jokes about women be acceptable if discussions about whether it applies to said women occurs afterwards?

In addition, it's far easier to have such open discussions among a group of like minded individuals. It's not any different than the discussions you see here. That's far different than joking about it during a public interview to people who probably won't "get it". It's called knowing your audience.

Sure, but again, I don't see its relevance to determining whether something is misogynistic.

The double standard is implied because the joke is about American cars being crap. So does that mean all non-American cars are better? I can see someone thinking "hey, I wonder what he thinks about <insert nation>'s cars if he thinks American ones are crap?"

Of course, maybe that person would be reading into the joke too much, right? A joke might just be a joke, meant for the cheap laugh and not anything deep? That's fair but then again, it is just a car. Telling a black man a racist joke about blacks is different from telling Ford a joke about how they make shitty Mustangs. Well, perhaps both might involve police afterwards. But one will linger and do more damage than the other, I think.

Yea, that would be reading into the joke too much. Nor do I think your analogy works in this case. My example was specific to your point as to the double standard in that they didn't make jokes about Iron Man/Batman.

Sure, that's fair. But in this case what they said was a reflection of misogyny in culture. Slut and whore are strong words, and they should be used carefully. That's why I said "Many people who partake in it, don't even realize it."

Like the person in Ahn's quote pointed out, it's not this one particular instance that is the problem, but that it is reflective of an issue of a whole. Constant open use of derogatory words and innuendo, even in jest, can shape how people talk to and treat each other.

Again, I understand the sentiment, but ultimately I do not agree with the conclusion. Do certain terms carry strong connotations and history? yes. But in cases when they're so obviously used in jest, I have no issues with it. Otherwise I would essentially be agreeing to the idea that freedom of thought and expression are to be bound by whatever reigning standards of morality deem to be acceptable.

That still doesn't mean there isn't something to the outrage. I'm interested in root causes of problems. There's something to be learned in every instance, including freakouts.

Agreed.

Have you ever considered that markets can be created and shaped? Ask yourself, did the preteen market exist before the 1990's? Remember how suddenly you starting hearing about stuff like "tweens"? Companies realized the children of the 80's and 90's had a lot of "parent money" that could be tapped into, so they tried creating a demographic no one had ever heard of. Today it's an industry worth billions. How about sports drinks? Do people really need them? Not really, but those commercials do a great job of convincing people otherwise. Marketing is really good at getting people to the point where they'll happily parrot and defend the "virtues" of brands and products blindly, even if it harms them.

Creating markets from nothing, shaping existing markets, using marketing to make people think, believe, and want whatever you're selling....there's a reason that marketing and propaganda are closely related.

FF14 bears a cross because they chose to be like everyone else at a time when people are being vocal about wanting something different. That's a criticism, not a crucifixion. There is a market demand for female armor that doesn't look like it is being sold to horny males. But if you can continue to make a healthy profit from pandering to those horny males, why take the risk? It's a catch 22.

Yes, but in those cases they decided to to tap into a new market, the onus cannot be placed on the shoulders of commercial entities. They may CHOOSE to do so if they want, but they should NOT be FORCED to do so at their own cost, no matter how worthy the cause may be. Cancer research is a very worthy cause, doesn't mean all medical company have a moral obligation to dump research money towards it.

As for FF14, let's put it in the proper context. The armors in question is literally two out of hundreds where both genders are identical:

Dragoon

Bard

Hardly something "being sold to horny males", not to mention that out of those other hundreds, there are plenty of that caters to those on the other end, armors that puts literal 6-packs on females (much to the chagrin of many female tanks), and plenty of male eye candies too. FF14 is probably the MMO that's most equal and open to everyone when it comes to armor design that's not a MUD, yet that's still sexist to some.

I would hope that by now you have noticed that I'm a pretty leveled headed, even handed type of person. I'm not big on crusading or tossing buzzwords out just for the sake of it. I'm not big on being part of any outrage machine. While I would say I'm a feminist, I'm an old school one. A lot of this modern internet social justice activism irritates me, to say the least. A lot of it is exploited for agendas and profit (like clickbait articles). Sexism exists on both sides of the gender divide, and I don't believe "men" are the sole problem many vocal internet "feminists" claim them to be.

Fair enough, my contention was the "lack of perspective" part. I see why they argue the way they do, I simply disagree with it.

But when it comes to something like this news piece, yeah, I'll call a spade a spade. The actors could have refused to answer the question, or chose better words to describe their opinions. These types of questions and their responses don't come up in many interviews, which is why this particular instance makes headlines. But hey, we're all guilty of saying something stupid once in a while, right? I'm not out for their heads. I'm sure they're good men who treat women great.

It's already blown over, and I'm sure the movie won't be harmed by it, nor the actors careers. But as a curious instance of a moment in time, there's something to be considered and said about how the answers those actors gave even comes up in the first place and how that reflects on our culture as a whole.

Actually, we wouldn't know if they're good men who treat women great - call me a cynic, but I think we've all seen more than a few celebrities who turn out to be asses

I mean, I never intended for my comment to escalate into a giant wall-o-text. My point wasn't that there's no misogyny or sexism or discrimination in general etc., but really just that not every offense rises to the level of labels being used.

[Eisdrache]

Originally Posted by maplehurry

Today is the 75 years anniversary of women's right to vote in Québec.

So show some respect and deal with it for today.

If I'd discuss this every day it has an anniversary in some city I'd never stop talking. The conversation is flat out not going anywhere as neither of them are willing to move from their point of view. This has been discussed at length before and is just moving in circles with minimal or no progress.

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by maplehurry

Today is the 75 years anniversary of women's right to vote in Québec.

So show some respect and deal with it for today.

But then shouldn't the argument be going on in French?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

But then shouldn't the argument be going on in French?

Je veux bien, mais ça enfreint les règles du forum.

(It wouldn't bother me, but it's against the forum rules.)

Originally Posted by kyp275

Convenient? I'm taking this as a not-so-thinly-veiled insinuation that I'm just making shit up.

Feel free to take a look yourself.

I'm not accusing you of making shit up in any way. But a lot of your arguments have been about "some people". In particular "Some people on the feminist side are assholes, so all feminist arguments are invalid".

Granted, I didn't pick the best place to point it out, but let's call it the straw that broke the camel's back.

...you're not even making sense anymore. I'm not the one saying that everything need to be political correct, you are.

I prefer to think people should show a minimum of consideration.

But my point is this: "some people", including you, treat political correctness as if it's about feelings. You argue that the problem with the joke is that it is tasteless, that it offends people. That it's all it is. And feelings, I think most people will agree, especially the feelings of a few who - you imply - will take offense at anything and everything, aren't worth thinking about.

But jokes aren't funny (or offensive, take your pick) in a vacuum. That they felt comfortable - and funny - saying that is reflective of a larger problem. One that deserves mention. That's why they're deserving of censure (but not, important nuance, censorship).

I'm not going to boycott the movie or anything. Tomorrow I'll have forgotten the incident entirely. I certainly wouldn't want to see them harassed in their own homes or have rape or death threats sent to them, the way "some people" (see how annoying that is?) on the anti-feminist side like to do when their hackles are up.

And there's the problem I see so often, where people twists what other people actually said.

What I said was that the jokes, while tasteless, does not rise to the level of misogyny, since when did that become "everyone should be complete dicks!"?

But the way you support your opinion is "some people take political correctness too far", a universal defense equally applicable to all disputes on the subject.

[ganbaru]

Twelve arrested in Baltimore after march to protest black man's death
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0NG0RQ20150426

Germany hints at preparations of a Plan B on Greece
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0NG0HB20150425

Originally Posted by Ithekro

But then shouldn't the argument be going on in French?

That would be just silly. Plus there's a good portion of the population's province than have English as first language and a good deal of those francophone ( like myself) have a good grasp of it as second language.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

I'm not accusing you of making shit up in any way. But a lot of your arguments have been about "some people". In particular "Some people on the feminist side are assholes, so all feminist arguments are invalid".

Granted, I didn't pick the best place to point it out, but let's call it the straw that broke the camel's back.

...was I supposed to take down a list of names? and no, my argument has always been about specific points, the "all feminist arguments are invalid" part is entirely your own creation, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

I prefer to think people should show a minimum of consideration.

But my point is this: "some people", including you, treat political correctness as if it's about feelings. You argue that the problem with the joke is that it is tasteless, that it offends people. That it's all it is. And feelings, I think most people will agree, especially the feelings of a few who - you imply - will take offense at anything and everything, aren't worth thinking about.

But jokes aren't funny (or offensive, take your pick) in a vacuum. That they felt comfortable - and funny - saying that is reflective of a larger problem. One that deserves mention. That's why they're deserving of censure (but not, important nuance, censorship).

I never said people shouldn't have issue with the jokes - feel free to be as outraged as you want about it. I only take issue with the label applied to said joke, for reasons I think I've went over enough times at this point.

If someone throw a cup of water in your face, you're within your rights to call it assault, and sue them as such if you want, but it'd be going too far if you try to call it attempted murder.

I'm not going to boycott the movie or anything. Tomorrow I'll have forgotten the incident entirely. I certainly wouldn't want to see them harassed in their own homes or have rape or death threats sent to them, the way "some people" (see how annoying that is?) on the anti-feminist side like to do when their hackles are up.

Not at all, I'm frankly baffled at what you find annoying about it. Does it annoy you when you see the statement "some people like beef more than chicken."?

But the way you support your opinion is "some people take political correctness too far", a universal defense equally applicable to all disputes on the subject.

So not liking my argument is justification for making shit up and putting words in my mouth?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by kyp275

...was I supposed to take down a list of names?

I'm saying it's irrelevant in the first place and shouldn't have been brought up at all. There are always assholes, everywhere.

and no, my argument has always been about specific points, the "all feminist arguments are invalid" part is entirely your own creation, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.



I never said people shouldn't have issue with the jokes - feel free to be as outraged as you want about it. I only take issue with the label applied to said joke, for reasons I think I've went over enough times at this point.

"The joke isn't misogynist because you say so", and "you're against people who take political correctness too far". That's the sum total of your arguments. (And what else am I supposed to think but that the latter is linked to the former?)

Not at all, I'm frankly baffled at what you find annoying about it. Does it annoy you when you see the statement "some people like beef more than chicken."?

Context, context, context. It bears repeating.

So not liking my argument is justification for making shit up and putting words in my mouth?

If I've misunderstood you, maybe it's my bad. Maybe it's yours.