Comments on: Sexist Comments from Video Gamers (Trigger Warning)

By: Jarrik32

Jarrik32 — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:34:00 +0000

Ignoring (for now) the gender element, I do find it very concerning that the vast majority of (near constant) verbal abuse dished out on fps is (in my experience) mostly dished out by 10 to 15 year old boys. As a bonus most of them shouldn’t even be playing those games (the 18 rating IS a legal restriction), so… wtf? P.S. Nobody enjoys the abuse, I can only offer female gamers my condolences (If I get called a fag by a 10 year old one more time…)

By: Samantha Henry

Samantha Henry — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:52:00 +0000

I’ve honestly never had this problem and I’ve been on the internet as a gamer for 12+ years…Full Disclosure wise I don’t play on Xbox Live or much FPS, but I do many multiplayer games including World of Warcraft and several other MMO type games.

By: decius

decius — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 21:37:00 +0000

I now think that you are using a different definition of “games”, one that is not founded on the definition provided in transactional analysis.
What are the sufficient characteristics for an interaction to be dominance?

By: decius

decius — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 21:33:00 +0000

Do you have any content to add, or are you trying to win?

By: Village Idiot

Village Idiot — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 13:42:00 +0000

Rather, you apparently don’t have an understanding what dominance is, which isn’t the same as having a different interpretation because the term has a formal definition. I suppose you could be referring to the kinky version played as a game between consenting adults, but games are not instances of genuine dominance.

And are U the same “Decius” who posted that “Tips on Picking up Women / Macking a Ho” on CaptainCynic.com awhile back? (this is the thread: http://TinyURL.com/8mj5wjg ) It has a similarly pseudo-intellectual syntax and phrasing to it that your comments here posses and it would certainly explain a lot.

By: Village Idiot

Village Idiot — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 13:21:00 +0000

If I’m more knowledgeable about your intentions than you are, it’s only because you must’ve forgotten that you stated them. You’re not as clever as you think you are, by the way.

By: decius

decius — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:15:00 +0000

Your understanding of dominance is different from mine.

By: decius

decius — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:11:00 +0000

I’ll let your words speak for themselves. You are at least no longer saying here that I am second class, so I will consider your reasons to believe that you are more knowledgeable about my intentions than I am.

By: meh

meh — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:33:00 +0000

Interesting way to try to derail the argument.

Are you attempting to state that insults involving characterization of the insulted person as feminine or gay is *not* implying that women and gay people are inferior?

‘Cause if you’re not, I’m missing your point. I can’t see the point of calling someone a sexist or racist epithet unless that epithet implies a host of negative associations about women/race, and doing so implies that certain negative characteristics inhere to members of the named group.

By: meh

meh — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:22:00 +0000

Thanks.

By: Village Idiot

Village Idiot — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:31:00 +0000

But aren’t you insulted when someone makes a dominance claim over you? Isn’t it the same as saying “you’re beneath me?”

Nobody (heheheh) respects who they dominate otherwise they wouldn’t be dominating them, so arguably the entire context of dominance and submission is an insult to human dignity. I suppose an aspect of ‘enlightenment’ is realizing this even if you happen to be the one doing the dominating.

By: Village Idiot

Village Idiot — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:22:00 +0000

Again, I didn’t call you “nobody,” I used your twisting of an idiom to point out that it was an ironically-hypocritical twist.

You may have posted what I claimed nobody argues, but you weren’t using it as an argument. You just admitted to using it as a backhanded way to tell someone to shove their arguments up their ass, and there’s no way to do that with “decorum” regardless of one’s word choice. That’s not an argument, therefore my claim that nobody argues with people by making the suggestion you made still stands.

In any case, here you are… participating. I guess that means even you don’t believe your own statements. Or maybe you just can’t resist the charisma of The Idiot? So far, nobody can… ;)

By: decius

decius — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 13:01:00 +0000

Fair enough-but I have met a woman who literally believed that, and violent metaphors have been equated to violence right here in this discussion.

By: decius

decius — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:58:00 +0000

So, no?

Contrast someone who says “A stereotype of kids raised by welfare moms and criminal dads who grow up to be welfare moms and criminals? THE HORROR!”

I’ll back down from my usual stance- I won’t insist that the two stereotypes have equivalent negative effects. They are, however, roughly equally inaccurate, and both of the have negative effects and no redeeming aspect.

By: decius

decius — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:47:00 +0000

>Nobody argues with people by suggesting they take their arguments and go shove them into piles for christ’s sake,

>But I didn’t call anybody “nobody”

I did argue by referencing an idiom, and modifying it in order to still imply the rudeness of the original while keeping the decorum I think is needed. My primary goal was to signal that I will not participate in remotely reasonable discussion with people who are asserting that I am a