it does, however, accurately describe the whitelash against Obama.
This is an example of a tremendously relevant and strictly on topic comment. If this was the Off-topic section, I just might deconstruct it.
I know more than a few of these individuals. In fact, one website sells tees so that one can be not just a social justice warrior, but a social justice paladin, rogue, bard, etc.
The fact some activists feel the compulsion to preface the self-sufficient term "Justice" with "Social" is a good indication they have a peculiar idea of fairness in mind. To compound the problem and divulge to the world their ignorance on a debate that has been going on for centuries now, they just can't fathom how anyone would oppose their highly idiosyncratic notion. But, I suppose, wearing a Tee makes ignorance fashionable.
I agree with this and could extrapolate it beyond video games. But as the saying goes, "when you're accustomed to privilege, equality looks like oppression."
Come back when you can demonstrate that privilege exists. I mean you can assert it, for years on end, no doubt about it. You can even print a T-shirt line with the motif in mind. But make a rational case for privilege, establishing causation not correlation? I'd guess it's beyond you.
Now here is a suggestion that seems to come out of nowhere, because it's disconnected with the claim that violence as a means to solve problems is a "masculine" trait.
Sometimes violence does solve problems. Getting physically attacked and reacting violently might solve the very real problem of an imminent threat to one's life. But that' self-defence. Let's see if that's what you have in mind.
I don't think much is going to change until people start getting violent. Lashing out. Suicide is a problem among LGBT, but they are killing themselves, not other people.
I really don't know how to take this. Is this incitement? Really?
If it is, then I can only hope the authorities monitor this forum.
If/when that changes, then I think we'll see more action against hate speech. But for now, it's too profitable, as we can see in the US.
The above quoted pearl of yours, now that I would describe as hate speech. Yet, because I am an individual of principles, I don't want to have you silenced. On the contrary, I want your views to reach as wide an audience as possible, so they can be exposed, debunked - which isn't terribly hard to achieve - and fought back against by peaceful, democratic and rational means. It's crystal clear just how authoritarian such views are. Of course, it's all in the name of tolerance. Authoritarianism, in the name of anti-authoritarianism.
(…) a social security card, where your "online identity" remains anonymous to everyone but authorities in the event that some illegal stuff goes down.
Whenever I read an appeal to violence - even if worded in what the author probably presumes to be subtle terms - I pounder upon the pertinence of authorities monitoring gaming forums.
Nevertheless, yes, it all starts with people contributing more than "get over it," "so what," "grow a thicker skin," "deal with it" that pervades this thread--toxic masculinity.
Interesting you would say that because I would, characterize your contribution to this thread as anything but interactive. Lengthy, yes. Engaging, not really.
Of course, most of the rage here is directed toward the questions, not the answers.
I haven't read anything that qualifies as rage, but maybe you have telepathic powers I most definitely lack. On second thought, I did read that which appears to be a subtle appeal to violence. And that can't come from a place of serenity, can it?
Last edited by a moderator: