DELETED

[Smooth Operator]

People wouldn't be running into these problems if they understood once and for all that we are all human, just human, not saints, not above others, just human. Some days are good some days are bad, some topics we know a lot about other we know jack shit about, sometimes we are level headed and sometimes we are emotional wrecks. That is what humans are, that is what they always will be.

So praise peoples achievement's instead of people, because for every piece of good we do there is a pile of shit stashed somewhere you don't yet know of.

 

[The Only Gay Eskimo]

Why would've anyone liked Wil Wheaton at any point in time, for anything?

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Huh, that sort of reminds me of something...

Spoiler

MASTACHIEFPWN thus begins to violently run towards the exit of this topic as if he were being chased by tigers for the inexcusable sin he hath just committed.

 

[AntiChri5]

I dunno, if GG is allowed to slander individuals and "SJWs/AGGros" right-and-left I think the same courtesy should be extended to Mr. Wheaton. His perspective is largely representative of... most everyone who doesn't support GG. I'm not saying it is right, but I really don't think his ideas of GG are really worth getting upset about. You're going to disagree with other people and they're sometimes going to disappoint you with what they say.

I mean, I consider myself a fan of Gary Oldman despite thinking a lot of his ideology is straight-up toxic. People aren't perfect, and their ideas of GG shouldn't make you turn your back on them.

GG is not the second coming of Christ, guys. It's really not that important int he scheme of things. If my personal hero Stan Lee said "SJWs" were just a bunch of whiny liberal arts majors I'd probably cringe for a minute, but I'd get over it. I mean, Stan's the man. Come on.

This is something i have noticed GG folks do so often. Every time an individual or series or whatever said anything against Gamergate, there was a rush of people pronouncing they could no longer support it.

Don't get me wrong, some people (Moviebob) go so fucking far that i can't blame anyone who has a different view for being unable to support them, but a lot of sensible, reasonable folks too.

 

[psijac]

I presume that in straight male targeted porn, the looks of the man is pretty irrelevant, and "performance" is more highly valued.

Supposedly if you put unattractive men in porn, the male viewers won't think the attractive female pornstars they are having sex with are out of their league. Or something.

Attractive men do gay porn for a paycheck that is much much bigger than the pay for straight scenes. its call gay for pay.