Vault101's guide to gender debates

[Vault101]

I did say I was entertained though, I figured you were just messing with people for the fun of it : p

a little from column A...a little from column B

 

[Vault101]

You may feel they're irrelevant, but the fact that a very slightly reworded rule 1 would be the answer to all our problems if anyone cared to do it.

"stop talking about it, achieving nothing, and go actually try to do something about it"

those arguments aren't "inherently" bad....but they're used as a derailment technique more often than not

[quote/]You didn't even actually address point 5, the fact that the ultimate conclusion to your rules is for everyone to just argue non-issues and never fix the problem, and in that sense, you're actually way worse than the #gamergate people, because they might actually not have any problem with people actively doing things, and you actually do seem to have a problem with people going out to actively fix the problem by creating things, hence rule 1.
.[/quote]

there is no "endgame" here, there is no clear defined "line" where something is "fixed"

-people make the games they want to see
-people "vote with their wallets"
-people play games they enjoy
-people criticise games

ALL AT THE SAME TIME

life is a multifaceted thing, where people can do a number of things....see my point about Eminem

 

[QuietlyListening]

If this thread is a trap, can we quickly lock the doors now? After all, if you're arguing about one thing, you are incapable of focusing any attention on anything else. While they're busy wrapping their heads around Vault's rules, we can trap them all in one fell swoop.

This is our chance! We've got them right where we want em!

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

See, this is why my perfectly respectable "What is your (realistic) dream job" dies after the first two pages. Why share your hopes and dreams when there is an opportunity for outrage and condescension?

 

[Vault101]

See, this is why my perfectly respectable "What is your (realistic) dream job" dies after the first two pages. Why share your hopes and dreams when there is an opportunity for outrage and condescension?

....hmmmm

rule 1!

essentially "complaining about something and feeling good about something are mutually exclusive"

 

[zen5887]

See, this is why my perfectly respectable "What is your (realistic) dream job" dies after the first two pages. Why share your hopes and dreams when there is an opportunity for outrage and condescension?

There is probably an interesting observation to be had about the difference between positive and negative discussion on the internet to be had about "Why share your hopes and dreams when there is an opportunity for outrage and condescension?"

But it's probably just because threads like that don't really generate discussion.

You see threads that are like "what's your favourite song" and it's pretty much just people posting their favourite song. No discussion, just people showing off their shit. A thread like this though, has something people can disagree with or challenge or praise. Then you get discussion because there is something to talk about beyond "I also like the thing you like".

What is there to say in a thread about dream jobs apart from "this is my dream job"?

 

[Vault101]

But it's probably just because threads like that don't really generate discussion.

You see threads that are like "what's your favourite song" and it's pretty much just people posting their favourite song. No discussion, just people showing off their shit. A thread like this though, has something people can disagree with or challenge or praise. Then you get discussion because there is something to talk about beyond "I also like the thing you like".

job"?

that and righteous anger is sooo soo good

for all this talk of wanting civility...people want that little buzz...that little anger challenge buzz

that said positivity isn't nessicaryly a conversation killer...it depends how its worded and how much room it has

 

[the December King]

That was funny!

Well, and also on target, I guess.

Personally, I would like women and other minorities to enjoy more games that cater to their demographic.

Although I rarely get to fully enjoy the same privilege (being a snake and all).

But seriously, although I'd like to see inclusivity in games, since I'm not really interested in playing/experiencing games that cater to other, specific demographics, I'm not going to buy them /support them with my wallet.

I'm not going to hate anyone, or harass anyone. Full stop.

Nor am I going to get 'upset' or 'angry', but that is harder to do, especially when generalizations are thrown around, and I am more of an emotional person than a fact-digger.

See, I can only ever really speak for myself in these kinds of discussions, because although I do share some of the basic tenants of what I see as feminism, I cannot speak for anyone else who might be one, or not, for that matter. I don't represent/speak for a demographic, even if I am a part of one.

 

[Saetha]

"Nooo, feminists don't want to censor anyone! We don't want to silence anyone! We don't to shut down discussion!

We just want to write up an arbitrary set of rules that obviously favor us with no input from non-feminist or feminist-critical persons, lay out these rules on a forum, and demand you abide by them before engaging us in debate, and basically tell you to sit there and nod your head and lap up every little line we feed you! That's all!"

Yeah, I'd be more inclined to follow these rules if they a) Actually acknowledge, explained, and warned against the various fallacies and arguments that feminists use, in addition to the ones currently stated, b) weren't so terrifically well-suited to shut downing potentially viable arguments just because you don't want to hear them, and c) wasn't dripping with obvious condescension and bias.

You know, if you're going to write "forum rules" talking about people can't use the "But the men!" argument, maybe you should draw up forum rules pointing out that feminists can't use the "1 in 5" stat, or the "The vast majority of DV victims are women," either. That'd be awesome, you know.

Also, side-note - I'm sick of tired of people telling me I "don't know what real feminism is." Maybe if your movement took responsibility for the massive piles of baggage it's accumulated, people would be more inclined to agree with you. But no, that can't be it, right? Everyone who disagrees with feminism must be a misogynist, right? Because anyone who steers clear of the label can't have valid reasons unrelated to sexism for doing it.

 

[Vault101]

Personally, I would like women and other minorities to enjoy more games that cater to their demographic.

Although I rarely get to fully enjoy the same privilege (being a snake and all).

the well known classic "Snake"?

your argument is void

"snipit.

ok write that out again....except take out reference to "feminists"

 

[Saetha]

"snipit.

ok write that out again....except take out reference to "feminists"

I'd have a nonsesnical post because most sentences are dependent on having a subject to make any sense?

If this is an attempt to point out my hypocrisy, sorry sweetheart, it ain't working. I'm just playing by the rules you gave me. You don't get to make up the game and then call me a hypocrite for joining in.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

Good lord, there have been some hilariously surreal perspectives in this thread. And this is coming from somebody who sees merit in the 'journalistic integrity' movement going on or whatever.

Regardless, I often find your posting style a little difficult to digest, Vault. It's very ramble-y, and I'm not sure I understood all that you tried to say. It just sort of goes all over the place after your initial points, though it manages to come full circle by the end.

I don't enjoy the use of labels in debates of recent events because there really are so many unique perspectives that people have on this issue that discrediting them by labeling them an 'MRA' or 'SJW' such-and-such is just fishing for a way to justify not listening to a differing (heaven forbid opposing) perception of events.

Of course, some perspectives aren't really worth listening to (as this thread can certainly show), but there are plenty of reasonable voices with differing opinions.

 

[Vault101]

If this is an attempt to point out my hypocrisy, sorry sweetheart, it ain't working.

I'd rather you not resort to borderline creepy condescending "pet" names ...thankyouverymuch

[quote/][b/]I'm just playing by the rules you gave me.[/b] You don't get to make up the game and then call me a hypocrite for joining in.[/quote]
no you're not because you broke rule 3/4 several times...now I assume you were aware of that...if not then...yeeeeah

again its very easy to label people something scary like "feminist" so you can create a large group of bogeywomen...without even knowing what some people actually do think

that everyone who may think this is a feminists, or that all feminists think that or that you can't think this or that and be a feminist at the same time or that feminists all want the same thing

 

[Vault101]

Regardless, I often find your posting style a little difficult to digest, Vault. It's very ramble-y, and I'm not sure I understood all that you tried to say. It just sort of goes all over the place after your initial points, though it manages to come full circle by the end.

rambly huh? well I don't often go back and edit...even big posts like this so that may be true

[quote/]I don't enjoy the use of labels in debates of recent events because there really are so many unique perspectives that people have on this issue that discrediting them by labeling them an 'MRA' or 'SJW' such-and-such is just fishing for a way to justify not listening to a differing (heaven forbid opposing) perception of events.
[/quote]
exactly, its reductive

 

[Sleepy Sol]

If this is an attempt to point out my hypocrisy, sorry sweetheart, it ain't working.

I'd rather you not resort to borderline creepy condescending "pet" names ...thankyouverymuch

[quote/][b/]I'm just playing by the rules you gave me.[/b] You don't get to make up the game and then call me a hypocrite for joining in.

no you're not because you broke rule 3/4 several times...now I assume you were aware of that...if not then...yeeeeah

again its very easy to label people something scary like "feminist" so you can create a large group of bogeywomen...without even knowing what some people actually do think

that everyone who may think this is a feminists, or that all feminists think that or that you can't think this or that and be a feminist at the same time or that feminists all want the same thing[/quote]

I would argue that the same tactic has been turned onto individuals (again, just with a different label) who have disagreed with the handling of recent events in the 'gaming journalism' world as of late.

There is no "feminist" or "feminazi" conspiracy. I personally don't feel 'feminism' (or TEH SJWS) should have ever been used as part of an argument against anything in this case, because all it did was make legitimate criticisms easier to dismiss for people who didn't perceive there to be any problems in the industry, or just didn't care (understandable considering it's long been present).

But again, 'teh MRAS' has been used as an argument as well. It's just a huge, terrible storm of dismissing opposition.

So yeah, I was just dropping by. I'm not going to argue about feminism or whatever because it was never what this whole ordeal was about to me. I identify as a 'feminist' (humanist as well I suppose) anyways. Whatever those terms happen to mean to people.

 

[Saetha]

[quote/][b/]I'm just playing by the rules you gave me.[/b] You don't get to make up the game and then call me a hypocrite for joining in.

no you're not because you broke rule 3/4 several times...now I assume you were aware of that...if not then...yeeeeah

again its very easy to label people something scary like "feminist" so you can create a large group of bogeywomen...without even knowing what some people actually do think

that everyone who may think this is a feminists, or that all feminists think that or that you can't think this or that and be a feminist at the same time or that feminists all want the same thing[/quote]

I broke rule 3? Where? I don't recall likening feminists to the Illuminati. I do not recall labelling them as a threat to art. And rule 4 - I wonder how you can preface a rule about not using the word "feminism" by repeatedly using the word feminism, telling other people that they just don't know what it means, and then ending it by saying to just refer to it as something else completely because - Gasp! - you don't want to take responsibility for the word's baggage. One would think if you wanted feminism to be left out of the debate, you wouldn't have broken your own rule by dragging it in.

Again, I'm just playing the game you made.

 

[Vault101]

But again, 'teh MRAS' has been used as an argument as well. It's just a huge, terrible storm of dismissing opposition.

I feel like that would be an even worse misuse of a label since the whole MRA thing seems rather specific and easyer to pin down

I mean you gotta use broad words to refer to groups of people, but I think mixing it with specific ideologies is problematic

 

[Sleepy Sol]

But again, 'teh MRAS' has been used as an argument as well. It's just a huge, terrible storm of dismissing opposition.

I feel like that would be an even worse misuse of a label since the whole MRA thing seems rather specific and easyer to pin down

I mean you gotta use broad words to refer to groups of people, but I think mixing it with specific ideologies is problematic

I agree here. Specific ideologies got associated with issues that had nothing to do with them (in my eyes).

I'm too tired to type more text, but I may contribute tomorrow. Thanks a bunch.

 

[Vault101]

I broke rule 3? Where? I don't recall likening feminists to the Illuminati. I do not recall labelling them as a threat to art.

you've used Feminist as an all encompassing umbrella term to group all opinions you don't agree with, as I said people are multifaceted and can have a range of views while aligning themselves with certain ideological movments

[quote/]And rule 4 - I wonder how you can preface a rule about not using the word "feminism" by repeatedly using the word feminism, telling other people that they just don't know what it means, and then ending it by saying to just refer to it as something else completely because - Gasp! - you don't want to take responsibility for the word's baggage. One would think if you wanted feminism to be left out of the debate, you wouldn't have broken your own rule by dragging it in.
.[/quote]
I don't know where I've thrown the term around but the point was not using the term Feminist unless its absolutely relevant...and you know...the fact it pays to look these things up

 

[Saetha]

I broke rule 3? Where? I don't recall likening feminists to the Illuminati. I do not recall labelling them as a threat to art.

you've used Feminist as an all encompassing umbrella term to group all opinions you don't agree with, as I said people are multifaceted and can have a range of views while aligning themselves with certain ideological movments

[I/]3.what is your argument based on?[/I]

are you frightened there are forces similar to the illuminati led by you know who waiting to destroy all good things? well fear not! this is merely a mass hysteria populating forums and not really indicative of real life

films have been under such examination far longer than ever and they are still [strike/]sexist as ever[/S] not PC centric pillars of inclusivity

no friends, the true threat to "art" is when the commercial side takes over, a push for better representation is not and will never be a "threat" to what we hold dear, and if you enjoy projects made from the heart with compelling and diverse characters this should not be a worry

Rule 3 says nothing of the sort. It makes no mention of people being multifaceted or generalized. It speaks solely of people who claim that this philosophy is a threat to art, better representation is a destroying what we hold dear, etc. I never mentioned any of this, never mentioned anything of the sort. Perhaps your rules could do with some revisiting, no?

[quote/]And rule 4 - I wonder how you can preface a rule about not using the word "feminism" by repeatedly using the word feminism, telling other people that they just don't know what it means, and then ending it by saying to just refer to it as something else completely because - Gasp! - you don't want to take responsibility for the word's baggage. One would think if you wanted feminism to be left out of the debate, you wouldn't have broken your own rule by dragging it in.
.

I don't know where I've thrown the term around but the point was not using the term Feminist unless its absolutely relevant...and you know...the fact it pays to look these things up[/quote]

The entire preface to rule four - hell, the bloody thing is named feminism.