Blogs from friends

Arts and Photography at its Finest
BFISH
  • Hello world!
    Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!

The Escapist

The Escapist Forums : Threads
  • Trump resurrecting TPP in NAFTA renegotiation

    bastardofmelbourne:
    the closest analogue I can think of would be if Trump had (hypothetically) continued to enforce his Muslim travel ban in the face of a court order suspending it.

    Do you think that would result in Donald Trump being hustled out of the White House in the dead of night by soldiers of the US Army, loaded on a plane and sent to Nova Scotia after which a forged letter of resignation would be read before Congress? The United States has such Constitutional crises without removing people from office at all. Oh look, some town put up another display in violation of the Establishment Clause-- we don't then drone strike the display or exile the mayor.

  • Trump: United States will not accept or allow trans people in the military

    Mentally unstable people, whoever they are, shouldn't be allowed in positions of authority or responsibility. But there's got to be a way to test people individually instead of judging them based on one of the social groups that they identify with. That's literally prejudice and discrimination. And you can't have that without evidence that it's some kind of national security problem.

    But the US has a weird obsession with sexuality and gender. I think that it's an intelligence issue. The dumber you are the more important you think those things are. They're really not important. And neither are the fuckin' bathrooms. The bathroom issue is for total imbeciles.

  • How gamergate ruined games

    Lightknight:
    Feel free to define it as you mean it if you're defining it differently.

    I'm prosexualism if I haven't made that point clear. I think it does far more harm to demonize and repress than it does to depict and allow humans to be humans.

    Sex negativity is the idea that some or all aspects of human sexuality are inherently harmful. Sex positivity by contrast dictates that sexuality is neither inherently harmful or helpful, it's all in how you behave about it. Above all, consent is the final arbiter.

    Do you want me to cite articles where they try to call out various artists like Hideo Kojima or the team behind Nier for their female characters? Where they try to shame and ridicule them? The very idea that they think being offended by their art gives them the right to attack them is disappointing. How about the debacle between the incredibly pointless Tracer pose?

    Yes. Pics or it didn't happen.

    I'm unsure why you disagree that the current atmosphere towards sexualized females in games or other media isn't negative. It seems like a given that I shouldn't have to establish.

    Is that why getting you to answer my questions is like pulling teeth? Sex positivity does not mean that criticism of the portrayal of sexuality in media is verboten.

    I'll ask this just once since I work for a living and my time is at a premium when I'm usually in front of a computer. Do you really disagree with this to the point where I need to cite it or are you just giving me a hard time because debating point for point can be a fun passage of time?

    You said you put years of thought into this. Show me, don't tell.

    I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge that there is another movement counter to that one in which they make it hostile to even consider taking constructive criticism on the degree of sexualization in their art. I have no problem seeing that happening and ridiculing it so I'd hope you'd give me the common courtesy of acknowledging the people on the opposite side from them as well.

    This is your perception of what is going on. None of your arguments indicate what epistemology you used to come to these conclusions, so I don't take them all that seriously. To me it sounds like nothing more than special pleading and argument from emotion.

    See, I have the extreme fortune of not giving any fucks. I enjoy games for the story and the adventure. The escapism too even though I don't consider my life in need of escape. So I'm able to sit back and look at both sides without getting all foamy at the mouth. I am sex-positive, so I have philosophical leanings to support depictions of sexuality in games but as long as a game is fun I don't actually care unless the point of the game is sexuality which it very rarely is.

    This is not a support of your argument, it's just you ringing your own bell. I'm not asking how you feel about sex, I'm asking for evidence of your assertions and thus far you have provided none. You have a lot of rhetoric. But rhetoric is not evidence.

    I didn't say if Grayson was right or wrong. It's your prerogative to side with either. I'm merely presenting the sort of example of a journalist with a goal in mind along the lines of claiming there's a moral imperative to address sexuality in games and hopefully along his own personal sensibilities. I do consider that to be antisexualism.

    You extrapolated all of that based on what?

    Again, I'm more than happy to continue this discussion with you but I've got to ask you to avoid making me dredge through the internet to proof fairly accepted/known givens just for the sake of it.

    Too bad. You've been asked for citations. If you can't provide them in good faith, then you shouldn't be making these claims.

    I hesitate to throw Anita Sarkeesian out here due to the insane reactions invoking her name can achieve. But yes, she had significant issues with portraying women as sexy and her narrative got a lot of traction within the journalism community. If you forced me to go hunting, I would merely track down her videos and the numerous articles that spawned around the times she released her videos in support and the significant radio silence of counterpoints against her. Even when she mis-defined terms like objectification as though being acted upon makes you objectified because you are the "object" of a sentence (e.g. "Respect Women!" would objectify women by her definition because that is the object of the sentence being acted upon. That's not how the term objectify works).

    Post her videos that you think prove your point.

    Do you really want a dozen links doing that

    Yes.

    I'm not sure the content of the criticism is relevant.

    For example, I have no problem with porn. Do you? Because it is by far the biggest "objectifier" of women as sexualized plaything. So if I'm talking with someone who would like to see porn eradicated then I'd like to know that to better inform future discussions regarding sexuality. If you don't have a problem then I've got to question the consistency of your internal logic here.

    What does any of that have to do with the content of the criticism?