New Call of Duty game let's players be Non-binary

[Dreiko]

You missed some points. The guy who got shot was specifically shot because of the rules. It specifically stated that he needed, to be in that position. The guy who got shot is getting angry at the rules wondering why he was chosen to get shot instead of someone else. It's not luck at all. Maybe, why don't we get rid of the rules that cause them to get shot?

Now the guy on the bike got his advantage, right. It's not about taking that advantage away. It's about trying to give that advantage to everyone. For example, there are some idiots who say that reading to your kid before bed time gives them an unfair advantage academically and should be banned. That's stupid (and probably the people who you are talking about being angry). Instead why don't we encourage everyone to read to their children. Get them all to the advantaged 'bike riding' level. Then, think about the people who are shot in this case - those children who don't have parents who read to them. So why don't we have some remedial classes to help them read at school

The rules that everyone agreed upon is that someone will end up being shot and they have no way of knowing who. You don't get to go back and ask for a redo just because you lost the draw.


The issue is that even when we encourage everyone to read to children, some people are just immature or irresponsible or insane or just assholes and sociopaths, so you will always have some kids not being read to.

Someone will always get shot in the leg. The way to fix this is to give the guy shot in the leg a badass robot leg, not to bemoan the normal people.

 

[Avnger]

No, because since it's part of the "secret history" genre, where the rules are it must not explicitly contradict established history, it makes the US government seem more progressive than it actually was, and is thus propaganda.

A massive shootout in the middle of the Kremlin involving CIA agents explicitly contradicts established history and yet you only seem to care about the non-binary option...

 

[Houseman]

A massive shootout in the middle of the Kremlin involving CIA agents explicitly contradicts established history and yet you only seem to care about the non-binary option...

How do you know such a shootout never happened?

 

[Trunkage]

Someone will always get shot in the leg. The way to fix this is to give the guy shot in the leg a badass robot leg, not to bemoan the normal people.

That’s literally what I said. Until that bad ass leg is given, there will be moaning about the rules. If you feel like that targeting you as a normal person. Great. Help fix the rules. They are talking to you in particular to get your vote on this issue.

Let’s take another example. Coal mining jobs in America has gone down by 4% most years, even with Trump trying to help. It’s now done to about 50k jobs. Here’s the problem. Trump gave the advantage to the business owner, thinking the owner would pass that benefit to the worker. He gave that bad ass leg to the wrong people. The privilege is that there was an assumption that rich people look after money well and would be best to look after the worker.

So, rightfully, coal mine workers should be annoyed at the situation. They should be pointing out the rules and saying it’s unfair. The US population voted in a succession of presidents who haven’t helped the coal miners. They should be pointing out where the advantage has gone until it’s fixed.

They’re not bemoaning you, they’re asking you to vote in a way that changes the laws. They cannot fix the problem themselves because that’s not how laws work

 

[Trunkage]

No, because since it's part of the "secret history" genre, where the rules are it must not explicitly contradict established history, it makes the US government seem more progressive than it actually was, and is thus propaganda.

Yes, we’ve all heard why this is important to you.

Does your no exclude people?

 

[Trunkage]

How do you know such a shootout never happened?

Is it history?

 

[Avnger]

How do you know such a shootout never happened?

Because a shootout involving the CIA in the Kremlin would have made the news for, if nothing else, USSR propaganda about the "warmongering capitalist imperialists." A KGB shootout in the White House, Pentagon, and/or Capitol Building would similarly make news.

One can't simply "hide" the amount of evidence of such an event in such a public place. There would be records for the cleanup, memory of the people involved during or after the fact, etc.

 

[Dreiko]

That’s literally what I said. Until that bad ass leg is given, there will be moaning about the rules. If you feel like that targeting you as a normal person. Great. Help fix the rules. They are talking to you in particular to get your vote on this issue.

Let’s take another example. Coal mining jobs in America has gone down by 4% most years, even with Trump trying to help. It’s now done to about 50k jobs. Here’s the problem. Trump gave the advantage to the business owner, thinking the owner would pass that benefit to the worker. He gave that bad ass leg to the wrong people. The privilege is that there was an assumption that rich people look after money well and would be best to look after the worker.

So, rightfully, coal mine workers should be annoyed at the situation. They should be pointing out the rules and saying it’s unfair. The US population voted in a succession of presidents who haven’t helped the coal miners. They should be pointing out where the advantage has gone until it’s fixed.

They’re not bemoaning you, they’re asking you to vote in a way that changes the laws. They cannot fix the problem themselves because that’s not how laws work

I do, I was a Bernie supporter. So I don't have to sit here and be spoken to about privilege as though I'm the guy on the bike.


The issue with the coal guys is more fundamental btw, because coal is going the way of the horse and carriage and all the people who were employed when they were in use (blacksmiths and stablehands and street cleaners and so on) and washer women and all those other jobs that became obsolete with progress. They're one of the guys who tripped and fell and is expecting everyone else to stop running until they can catch up. There ain't no stopping with progress, you gotta just deal with the fact that you tripped and fell and now you're behind.


So yeah, there's no fixing coal getting progressively less efficient to burn for energy, it's already starting to be more expensive than green energy and we haven't even started seriously focusing on it yet. About the best thing you can do for coal miners is to subsidize their retraining and also have a UBI in place for them and others who will be made obsolete through progress. With the couf in place a lot of restaurant and other retail workers will be likely needing this as well so it's not a niche issue either.

 

[Houseman]

Is it history?

Does every detail of everything that ever happens gets recorded in history?
The answer is no. The gaps in the coverage is where the "secret history" sneaks in.

For example, just throw your protagonist in the middle of the Bay of Pigs invasion. Nobody can say they weren't there! It's not like every single participant was listed, and it's also not like cover-ups don't exist.

Does your no exclude people?

Why would it?

Because a shootout involving the CIA in the Kremlin would have made the news for, if nothing else, USSR propaganda about the "warmongering capitalist imperialists."

Did they know that it was the CIA participating in the firefight, as opposed to, say, Russian defectors? They already knew there was a traitor in their midst. IIRC they were disguised and not even outed by Zakhaev while riding in an elevator with him (unless the player messes up and says the wrong thing)

If Gorbachev were to call up Reagan and accuse him of being responsible for this, he would undoubtedly deny (hence black ops), and what evidence would Gorbachev have?

For all they know it could have been Perseus. They said, when the idea was proposed, that Perseus was maybe operating without authorization. At the end of the game, in the bad ending, it says that the Kremlin is in disarray, implying that they weren't in sync.



Or you could be right, and it could just be a plot hole. Overlooking something doesn't suddenly mean it changes genres from "secret history" to "alternate universe".

 

[Trunkage]

Why would it?

Thanks for proving the point. You aren’t aware of what you are doing.

 

[Houseman]

Thanks for proving the point. You aren’t aware of what you are doing.

I don't suppose you could explain "the point" with actual words?

 

[Trunkage]

The issue with the coal guys is more fundamental btw, because coal is going the way of the horse and carriage and all the people who were employed when they were in use (blacksmiths and stablehands and street cleaners and so on) and washer women and all those other jobs that became obsolete with progress. They're one of the guys who tripped and fell and is expecting everyone else to stop running until they can catch up. There ain't no stopping with progress, you gotta just deal with the fact that you tripped and fell and now you're behind.


So yeah, there's no fixing coal getting progressively less efficient to burn for energy, it's already starting to be more expensive than green energy and we haven't even started seriously focusing on it yet. About the best thing you can do for coal miners is to subsidize their retraining and also have a UBI in place for them and others who will be made obsolete through progress. With the couf in place a lot of restaurant and other retail workers will be likely needing this as well so it's not a niche issue either.

I’m not disagreeing with you here. I also picked a problem where ‘shot in the foot’ person may be misattributing HOW they got shot in the foot. I agree, pumping more money into coal isn’t going to solve the problem. And I don’t think we have a good fix for this. Especially when ‘more coal’ seems to be their solution. They probably don’t want you or me telling them they are in a dying industry. Rahm just telling them to learn code is definitely NOT a solution. The UBI and retraining is great but there doesn’t seem to be an appetite for that by the GOP or the DNC

I do, I was a Bernie supporter. So I don't have to sit here and be spoken to about privilege as though I'm the guy on the bike.

You’re being talk to like your own of the ‘normal people’ and being compared to the person shot. Unless someone is telling you that you are super rich etc because THOSE are the people on the bike. (There are probably are those sort of people who say your super rich, so feel free to tell them to go jump. And the caveat is that I’m assuming your not super rich.)

Like, I’m well off. I have food, a home, a partner. I’m not the guy of the bike. I’m the normal person. When people speak to me of privilege, it’s to get them where I am. And I WANT them to be there.

 

[Trunkage]

I don't suppose you could explain "the point" with actual words?

You feel like you don’t exclude people. Other people think you are.

 

[Houseman]

You feel like you don’t exclude people. Other people think you are.

Those people are wrong.

 

[Trunkage]

Those people are wrong.

Alrighty bud. Also, expect disagreement

 

[Houseman]

Alrighty bud. Also, expect disagreement

As you might have seen, I'm no stranger or enemy to disagreement. It's a friend of mine, in fact.

 

[Terminal Blue]

You'd not treat it as pathological, you'd treat it as an "at risk group". Treating it as pathological would be like saying it's their fault that society is structured in a way that puts undue stress to them as opposed to women, when in fact they're being victimized by this system and are in no way less deserving of recompense than your run of the mill oppressed minorities would be.

Not that but it does add credulence to the notion that the vast majority of men suffer in silence. Maybe they don't want to be seen as weak or lack the support structure many women have or they feel hopeless b/c they can't meet expectations. Anything is possible. Men definitely seem to fall easier into social isolation.

The example I gave there was deliberately misleading, and I intentionally left out a lot of information to see what people would read into it.

It's estimated that only one in 20 suicide attempts results in death. While the majority of successful suicides are male, the majority of suicide attempts are made by women. Suicidal behaviour is overwhelmingly female, while suicidal mortality is overwhelmingly male. Many predictors of suicide, such as clinical depression, are also far more common in women than in men.

We don't know exactly why this phenomenon occurs, but the most likely explanation is that women simply turn to suicide more easily than men. Suicide is psychologically very difficult, it requires a huge amount of resolve and commitment. In short, because women are more prone to suicidal behaviour they may make suicide attempts before they have developed the resolve to die. Thus, their suicide attempts tend to fail, and women are able to receive treatment and affect changes in their environment to avert more serious suicidal behaviour. Men, who are less likely to consider suicide, may only turn to it when things have already become very serious and thus when heir suicidal intent is higher.

What this should indicate is suicide is a very complex phenomenon, and not a straightforward measure of the difficulty or "stress" a person faces in life.

 

[stroopwafel]

The example I gave there was deliberately misleading, and I intentionally left out a lot of information to see what people would read into it.

It's estimated that only one in 20 suicide attempts results in death. While the majority of successful suicides are male, the majority of suicide attempts are made by women. Suicidal behaviour is overwhelmingly female, while suicidal mortality is overwhelmingly male. Many predictors of suicide, such as clinical depression, are also far more common in women than in men.

We don't know exactly why this phenomenon occurs, but the most likely explanation is that women simply turn to suicide more easily than men. Suicide is psychologically very difficult, it requires a huge amount of resolve and commitment. In short, because women are more prone to suicidal behaviour they may make suicide attempts before they have developed the resolve to die. Thus, their suicide attempts tend to fail, and women are able to receive treatment and affect changes in their environment to avert more serious suicidal behaviour. Men, who are less likely to consider suicide, may only turn to it when things have already become very serious and thus when heir suicidal intent is higher.

What this should indicate is suicide is a very complex phenomenon, and not a straightforward measure of the difficulty or "stress" a person faces in life.

Well, you could argue that with women a suicide attempt is a cry for help while with men the intent is really death. People are defined by their actions not what they say. That so many men commit way more suicide than women can also be considered that the depth of their despair is much more profound. You could argue about the reasons all day long but in general men are seen as much more disposable. In wars, during calamities(women and children first), with dangerous or hazardous occupations. There is a general social climate where men can't admit to being vulnerable. This is what I think leads to isolation and ultimately a downward spiral of depressive feelings. There isn't this safety net that many to most women have and the lack of that ultimately leads to more 'succesful' suicide attempts and a much higher degree of homelesness.

Not just that but also way more men(espescially young men) are incarcerated than women, with another vulnerability being their biology(ie hormones) that lead to disinhibited impulse control and poor restraint. Both social and biological factors put men at much higher risk for both delinquent behavior and self-harm. Ultimately there are the demands of the society, the urges from the body and the expectations of the individual that collectively have a high likelihood of turning into frustrated desire, stress and depressive feelings. Women have these same issues ofcourse as well but it expresses differently. None have it better but this notion of male 'privilege' should really be put to bed for good because this doesn't account for 99% of men. If this isn't bad enough there is the media where men are structurally seen as child molestors and rapists and where men constantly need to excuse and explain themselves and, all things considered, it isn't strange so many men feel alienated from society.

Add this to the fact that there is a lack of male role models with the amount of divorced parents and absent fathers and I don't find it surprising that many young men flock to people like Jordan Peterson.

 

[Thaluikhain]

There is a general social climate where men can't admit to being vulnerable.

That part is definitely, true, a lot of the rest not so much.

Interestingly, there is a bias (presumably cultural) about suicide methods. For whatever reason, men tend to prefer using firearms much more than women, and firearms are very good for suicides. As an aside, when Australia tightened gun control some years back, there was a massive drop in male firearms suicides, without a corresponding increase in suicides due to other methods.

 

[stroopwafel]

That part is definitely, true, a lot of the rest not so much.

Interestingly, there is a bias (presumably cultural) about suicide methods. For whatever reason, men tend to prefer using firearms much more than women, and firearms are very good for suicides. As an aside, when Australia tightened gun control some years back, there was a massive drop in male firearms suicides, without a corresponding increase in suicides due to other methods.

With male suicide attempts there seems to be a preference for methods that are surely lethal. I mean, a gunshot wound to the head will usually do the trick. People don't want to recover with severe debilitation or brain damage. There are even reports of men tying their hand together with the gun on the arm of the chair with tape so they can fire again if the attempt failed. I mean, men usually don't take one aspirine too many as a cry for help that is then reported as 'suicide attempt'. In my country many people commit suicide by jumping in front of a train, which is a very gruesome method when you think about it. There are even all these signs with numbers of suicide hotlines and ''please don't do it'' or high fences everywhere.

But yeah, I think the fear of severe debilitation or mutilation is ultimately bigger than someone's suicide wish. So men in particular will only resort to methods with the highest degree of 'success' and not other methods since the intent isn't really a cry for help. In that light it makes sense that there is drop in suicides with tightened gun controls.