Zero Punctuation: Papers, Please and Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons

[RedmistSM]

This was a fun one, cracked up several times.
I had the same experience going through Brothers in one sitting. Never bored, but never moved a lot either. Im grateful to finally have a critic I frequent that shared that journey instead of the ones that were moved to tears by it. Felt like I was alone and more cynical than I thought.

 

[snowfi6916]

Then you're not reallly in a relashionship, sorry. Relationships do not become real until you have known each other in person for at least some time, and certainly not until you have personally met.
Hate to spoil your happiness, but if she asks to help her with money or something - do not send her anything under any circumstances and stop contacting her immediately. Too many conmen use that method now.

So I guess the world has to adhere to what YOUR definition of a relationship is?

First, I do not insist on anything. This was just an advice. Sure, you are free to use your own definitions - just don't complain if something bad happens as a result.
Second, it is not "my definition", I simply use definition that is already widely known.

Also, world will not "adhere" to anything anyway.

And you have never said what your definition of relationship is. Do tell how you define it, if that's not too hard.

I define it as simply wanting to be together and loving each other. Distance, physical contact, all that stuff is important, and if we want it to work we WILL need that at some point, but it doesn't mean we don't have a relationship.

I did not mean that you're not in ANY relationships right now - I just meant that this particular one looks flimsy.

Another red flag - "open relationships". Under that trendy convinient pharse people simply hide their unwillingness to have commitment or responsibilities to their partner. Or just fornication - if person don't like anything, they can simply bail at any time.

Why would you even consider dating others if you and your gf are compatible and are committed to each other?

An open relationship doesn't mean that we aren't committed to each other. I have seen relationships like this work. I have a transwoman friend of mine who was married to her wife before coming out, and now also has a boyfriend. Her wife is totally fine with it, and her boyfriend is totally fine with it.

That's all that's required to have an open relationship work. ALL parties need to be on the same page, and communication is important.

But as I said, we are so in love with each other that we can't even think of other people to be with. So I guess it's not really open... it's just an option that none of us wants to do.

 

[JudgeGame]

It actually was in "50 cent: Blood on The Sand" review. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/616-50-Cent-Blood-on-the-Sand

snip
Now, none of this has happened yet, because we are also long distance, so we have only talked over the Internet.

Then you're not really in a relashionship, sorry. Relationships do not become real until you have known each other in person for at least some time, and certainly not until you have personally met.
Hate to spoil your happiness, but if she asks to help her with money or something - do not send her anything under any circumstances and stop contacting her immediately. Too many conmen use that method now.

It's the 21st century. Your standards of what a "real" relationship constitutes are a little outdated.

What do you mean? What, in 2001 ALL of the standards just magically shifted for no reason and with no explanation?

Apparently, 21st century simply cannot exist without debauchery because without it, everything will revert to Dark Ages.

Internet dating has been pretty normal for the last few decades and I know a lot of people who never met their partner for years and eventually got married anfd started a family.

Your standards are nothing but prejudices left over from a dead world and in case I didn't make it clear enough the concept of classifying relationships as "real" or otherwise is just elitist dribble meant to discriminate.

As long as two people can talk and learn about each other they can fall in love. This is something I would expect children to understand.

In case you weren't aware, conmen have been extorting people out of money with the promise of an intimate relationship for thousands of years and the rise of the Internet hasn't done anything to change that landscape.

PS your use of the word debauchery just puts the cherry on the cake. If you were trying to lose all credibility you went above and beyond the call of duty.

 

[Dustin Reitzel]

I had no idea that a "bureaucracy-'em-up" even existed until Papers, Please.

 

[Miroluck]

While it would be fun to believe you have stepped out of a time machine I'm going to have to assume you are a troll.

Not another time, simply another place, I believe. Is my views "outdated"? Maybe that's because I have not been taught progressive ways of tolerasty.

 

[Jandau]

I love how a absolutely throwaway joke made this thread burst into flames like powdered plutonium.

Came into the thread to see some followup jokes about this week's ZP, ran into into a transsexual flamewar. It's like walking into your local mom&pop bakery to pick up some muffins only to find a Satanic sacrifice ritual in progress...

 

[crimsonshrouds]

and still acknowledge that a man with a consistent sexual preference for men who identify as women is most definitely not straight.

If someone identifies as a woman, they're a woman. They're not "men who identify as women", they're women.

And the third whiner.

You know the reason you three people made me wanna reply to you'll? I was on the receiving end of some nice bit of bile and hatred at work today. Im an Atheist by the way and i live in the bible belt.

You three are complaining about some jokes on a video with absolutely no vitriol or hatred behind them. There was no demeaning here or anything of that nature. You three are so soft skinned that this bothered you?

You three are a bunch of sad individuals who have wasted my time and a bunch of other peoples time with your pointless whining over something that had no hatred whatsoever. How about you worry about those that espouse hatred instead of jokes?

Right, because you being an athiest is totally the same as someone being transgender, right? And how have I "wasted your time"? I didn't make you read my comment, you could have skipped right over it. In fact, you had to collate those three quotes for your post so, in fact, you wasted your own time.

Maybe when the transgender community stops having the highest rate of suicide and stops being one of the most-targeted groups for assault/abuse/murder we'd be able to actually talk about things being 'jokes' or 'hatred'. And you - yes, you - cannot tell people what is or isn't offensive, because it's *subjective*. You have no 'right' to tell me or others that we cannot (or shouldn't) be offended by something. We all know Yahtzee is offensive, most of us have probably watched him for years, but this - for me - was when he crossed the line.

Also, it's not about "worrying about those who espouse hatred". It's about challenging ignorance, because ignorance is just as hurtful and as damaging as hatred can be. If we don't stand up and say "No, that was too far", then nothing will change.

The problem? There is no ignorance here. You have basically shown that there can be no talking or discussion with your community. Your community overreacts to things based on your actions. The suicide thing being brought up multiple times doesn't show people's ignorance. It shows that you have a victim complex meaning you are always the victim whether or not you are being victimized. If you have watched Yahtzee for years without getting upset over these jokes proves what I say. Because quite a few dead jews gypsies and homosexuals would be offended by a lot of Yahtzee's nazi jokes.

Oh i don't equate my self or other atheist with transgender people. But we are pretty much part of hated groups. All you have done is hurt your own community and over what? A stupid joke. You are not challenging ignorance, just wasting time playing the victim when there isn't anyone here to harm you.

 

[JimB]

Then you're not reallly in a relashionship, sorry. Relationships do not become real until you have known each other in person for at least some time, and certainly not until you have personally met.
Hate to spoil your happiness, but if she asks to help her with money or something - do not send her anything under any circumstances and stop contacting her immediately. Too many conmen use that method now.

Just for the record, I did not say this. Someone messed up their quote tags somewhere along the way.

It doesn't matter what someone identifies as.

It matters significantly more than what you identify them as.

This reminds me of the Jimquistion where Jim pointed out that, just because the Asari are supposed to be genderless, does not make Femshepard having sex with Liara any less lesbian. That's because the Asari have a human female form.

No, it's because the character is fictional but was given a female form in a cheap, ridiculous dodge to pander to people with lesbian fetishes while trying to say there's no scandalous homosexuality going on in the game.

(Aside: When I logged on, this thread had one hundred and forty-three pages on it. Now it has six. I really hope that was some kind of error and not a hundred pages of spam and trolling that just got deleted.)

 

[Miroluck]

Then you're not reallly in a relashionship, sorry. Relationships do not become real until you have known each other in person for at least some time, and certainly not until you have personally met.
Hate to spoil your happiness, but if she asks to help her with money or something - do not send her anything under any circumstances and stop contacting her immediately. Too many conmen use that method now.

Just for the record, I did not say this. Someone messed up their quote tags somewhere along the way.

Just a typo. It's fixed.

 

[JimB]

Just for the record, I did not say this. Someone messed up their quote tags somewhere along the way.

Just a typo. It's fixed.

I appreciate that, sir.

 

[Zombie Badger]

I doesn't matter what someone identifies as. A male is biologically male. Their chromosomes are XY. Putting on a dress and wearing makeup is not going to change that.

Someone who is transgender is mentally the opposite gender to their physical sex, and as far as their physical sex goes, I'd say that hormone replacement therapy and surgery to the point someone would need to be a gynecologist to tell that you hadn't always been the way you are more than crosses that boundary.

I know that Yahtzee regularly makes jokes at the expense of any and all groups of persons and I find them very amusing, but now he made a joke at the expense of a group of persons which I have emotional investment in! I am horribly offended and can no longer watch this video series.

The problem is not that Yahtzee made an offensive joke. He does that all the time and to pretty much everyone. The thing is though that those jokes were intended to be offensive and regardless of taste I will not complain about because that is the point of the. The problem is the politician joke was not intended to be offensive, as it is just a slight variation on the classic closeted politician joke in which the joke is at the politician's expense. Yahtzee's joke however relies on the view that transgender people cannot be considered anything but their physical birth sex prior to surgery and only works if you believe that view, and the fact that Yahtzee made a joke reliant on that has the unfortunate implication that he subscribes to that view, with is both demonstrably wrong and has long been used to denigrate transgender people. If Yahtzee had made an offensive joke about transgender people intentionally, I might consider it offensive but I would not be complaining right now.

 

[Evonisia]

I know that Yahtzee regularly makes jokes at the expense of any and all groups of persons and I find them very amusing, but now he made a joke at the expense of a group of persons which I have emotional investment in! I am horribly offended and can no longer watch this video series.

What I got from this was "Yahtzee can insult whoever or whatever he wants, so long as it's not something I like/am a part of/support".

 

[Teoes]

I love how a absolutely throwaway joke made this thread burst into flames like powdered plutonium.

Came into the thread to see some followup jokes about this week's ZP, ran into into a transsexual flamewar. It's like walking into your local mom&pop bakery to pick up some muffins only to find a Satanic sacrifice ritual in progress...

Quite. My money's on next week's Extra Punctuation being an interesting read. I wonder what on Earth he'll be out to discuss.

 

[EvilRoy]

The thing is, Yahtzee is saying that anyone who would have sex with a pre-op transgender person would be gay, which implies that any pre-op or non-op people cannot be considered in any way to be their desired gender. Now, the thing with the definition of gay and straight is that they are not based on genitalia, instead being based on gender. As strange as it may sound, being attracted to penis does not make you gay. Being attracted to people of the same gender (regardless of their genitals) does. This can be seen in that MtF transsexual porn is exclusively consumed by straight men (Details on FtM porn is hard to find and its existence is often debated). Gay men (such as myself) are not attracted to women, regardless of their genitalia, and MtF transgender individuals are not considered attractive to gay men due to them being distinctly female.

I'm wondering if you are able to cite precedence for this belief? After reading your comment I looked into the matter and I am unable to find any sources that concur with your statement, unless you are working from an entirely colloquial basis.

It seems to me that simple etymology demonstrates that your statement, though having meaning in a social sense, does not actually conform to the meaning of the word. Simply: Homo - from the Greek homos meaning "same" and Sexual - from the Latin Sexualis meaning "sexual" as pertaining to "sex". Same is readily defined, and sex as defined by Merriam-Webster is "either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures".

To my mind this leaves no room for debate with respect to the self identified gender of any individuals under consideration, as gender is not considered in the definition of the word. The only point of debate I can see is the question of whether a post of MtF or reverse can be considered to have altered their primary reproductive structures enough to be considered as the target sex.

 

[Zombie Badger]

I'm wondering if you are able to cite precedence for this belief? After reading your comment I looked into the matter and I am unable to find any sources that concur with your statement, unless you are working from an entirely colloquial basis.

It seems to me that simple etymology demonstrates that your statement, though having meaning in a social sense, does not actually conform to the meaning of the word. Simply: Homo - from the Greek homos meaning "same" and Sexual - from the Latin Sexualis meaning "sexual" as pertaining to "sex". Same is readily defined, and sex as defined by Merriam-Webster is "either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures".

To my mind this leaves no room for debate with respect to the self identified gender of any individuals under consideration, as gender is not considered in the definition of the word. The only point of debate I can see is the question of whether a post of MtF or reverse can be considered to have altered their primary reproductive structures enough to be considered as the target sex.

My man evidence for my statement that being into pre-op transwomen is not gay is that homosexual men (like myself) are not attracted to them. You will rarely if ever find gay porn sites with MtF porn on them, for example. If gay men are not into something, then it cannot be considered gay, just like with having sex with women who have vaginas. As far as defining someone as a man or a woman goes, I'll take their gender identity as the defining characteristic every time. The physical transformation is more important because it allows the person to feel comfortable with their body, which can be a great deal of stress for them.

 

[EvilRoy]

I'm wondering if you are able to cite precedence for this belief? After reading your comment I looked into the matter and I am unable to find any sources that concur with your statement, unless you are working from an entirely colloquial basis.

It seems to me that simple etymology demonstrates that your statement, though having meaning in a social sense, does not actually conform to the meaning of the word. Simply: Homo - from the Greek homos meaning "same" and Sexual - from the Latin Sexualis meaning "sexual" as pertaining to "sex". Same is readily defined, and sex as defined by Merriam-Webster is "either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures".

To my mind this leaves no room for debate with respect to the self identified gender of any individuals under consideration, as gender is not considered in the definition of the word. The only point of debate I can see is the question of whether a post of MtF or reverse can be considered to have altered their primary reproductive structures enough to be considered as the target sex.

My man evidence for my statement that being into pre-op transwomen is not gay is that homosexual men (like myself) are not attracted to them. You will rarely if ever find gay porn sites with MtF porn on them, for example. If gay men are not into something, then it cannot be considered gay, just like with having sex with women who have vaginas. As far as defining someone as a man or a woman goes, I'll take their gender identity as the defining characteristic every time. The physical transformation is more important because it allows the person to feel comfortable with their body, which can be a great deal of stress for them.

That... is not a compelling argument. Are you at least able to cite evidence that your claim with respect to homosexual males not being attracted to MtF is universal rather than simply being a personal preference you hold?

I cannot accept your claims with respect to pornography acting as a demonstration of this, as one similarly rarely finds pornographic websites containing both MtF and heterosexual pornography. Transsexuals are apparently categorized arbitrarily separately by purveyors of porn, much like websites catering specifically to men who like extremely large women and those catering specifically to men who like extremely thin women.

With respect to your statements on personal identity defining individuals, it is a fair point but unrelated to the discussion. The word homosexual has no relation to or basis in gender, only physical sex. Checking a tangent - I can find no evidence of the word gay being used as slang for homosexum, which is what you are actually describing (sexum being Latin for gender - that is, "same gender" attraction).

The game takes place in a soviet bloc. You don't lose your job for making mistakes, you just lose your wages. It's not about long-term career prospects, it's about keeping your family from starving, going cold and getting sick and dying.

I see, I wasn't aware of how jobs are distributed and held in the Soviet Bloc. Thanks for telling me that, I'll take some time to learn about it.

 

[Zombie Badger]

I cannot accept your claims with respect to pornography acting as a demonstration of this, as one similarly rarely finds pornographic websites containing both MtF and heterosexual pornography. Transsexuals are apparently categorized arbitrarily separately by purveyors of porn, much like websites catering specifically to men who like extremely large women and those catering specifically to men who like extremely thin women.

With respect to your statements on personal identity defining individuals, it is a fair point but unrelated to the discussion. The word homosexual has no relation to or basis in gender, only physical sex. Checking a tangent - I can find no evidence of the word gay being used as slang for homosexum, which is what you are actually describing (sexum being Latin for gender - that is, "same gender" attraction).

I will admit my ability to cite sources on my claims are somewhat limited here, and I am largely working with my own experiences. Quick google searches only really turn up articles about straight men being attracted to transwomen, although I have found stuff about gay men being attracted to transmen. All I can really say is that in all my time on the internet, I have heard many straight men refer to their attraction to transwomen, but no gay men referring to the same. I also think we have different porn sites, and every large scale heterosexual site I have seen has a specific category for MtF porn (usually labled 'shemale').

Regarding the difference between homosexuality and homoromanticism, I have to thank you for reminding me of that, as I had forgotten. You do make an interesting point, but unfortunately in the public consciousness the two are usually considered indistinguishable so in the when people makes jokes on the subject the distinction is almost always lost on them.

 

[EvilRoy]

I cannot accept your claims with respect to pornography acting as a demonstration of this, as one similarly rarely finds pornographic websites containing both MtF and heterosexual pornography. Transsexuals are apparently categorized arbitrarily separately by purveyors of porn, much like websites catering specifically to men who like extremely large women and those catering specifically to men who like extremely thin women.

With respect to your statements on personal identity defining individuals, it is a fair point but unrelated to the discussion. The word homosexual has no relation to or basis in gender, only physical sex. Checking a tangent - I can find no evidence of the word gay being used as slang for homosexum, which is what you are actually describing (sexum being Latin for gender - that is, "same gender" attraction).

I will admit my ability to cite sources on my claims are somewhat limited here, and I am largely working with my own experiences. Quick google searches only really turn up articles about straight men being attracted to transwomen, although I have found stuff about gay men being attracted to transmen. All I can really say is that in all my time on the internet, I have heard many straight men refer to their attraction to transwomen, but no gay men referring to the same. I also think we have different porn sites, and every large scale heterosexual site I have seen has a specific category for MtF porn (usually labled 'shemale').

Regarding the difference between homosexuality and homoromanticism, I have to thank you for reminding me of that, as I had forgotten. You do make an interesting point, but unfortunately in the public consciousness the two are usually considered indistinguishable so in the when people makes jokes on the subject the distinction is almost always lost on them.

In as far as porn sites, I neglected to include "porn aggregation" websites as part of my statement as they typically also include some sort of homosexual section for each gender, somewhat diminishing their value as a point of comparison. Additionally, it comes to mind that a homosexual individual and a heterosexual individual, when searching for porn, might tailor their own search terms in subtle ways such that results at least somewhat respond to personal preference regardless of target. That is unsubstantiated of course, although I'm curious to look into it now.

With respect to intent in jokemaking, I would more readily argue that homosexual is the most likely meaning, simply because the inescapable torrent of news streaming from the United States is currently focused squarely on same-sex marriage and the multitudes of so forths and furthers involved with it. I feel this is reason enough to believe the public consciousness is focused primarily on same sex as of late, rather than same-gender, and additionally because the matter of 'gender' with regards to transsexual individuals is often hotly debated and unfixed in some countries, and a complete non issue in others.

 

[Toilet]

2008 - Yahtzee makes an uncountable amount of gay jokes in his Army of Two review; zero fucks were given.
2013 - Yahtzee makes a single joke about performing fellatio on pre-op transsexuals; The Escapist explodes.

If you suck dick and you are a dude then there is a good chance you are gay regardless of what the dick is attached to or what the owner of the dick identifies as. Did the definition of gay change in the last 5 years or something?

Also I like Papers, Please as well, it's the most fun I have had being a bureaucrat.