inherit
Warning Points: 1
3116
0
Aug 28, 2024 23:38:02 GMT
8,041
vonuber
2,580
January 2017
vonuber
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by vonuber on Mar 5, 2017 12:24:52 GMT
It's funny how a lot of these arguments have only come about when the status quo of male dominance in society is under threat. How hum.
For what it's worth, I was raise by my dad only (my mum left my dad, me and my sisters when I was 5) and it was tough. Doesn't make me hate women or get bitter about it, or start bemoaning about people on tumbler or bioware apparently being the vanguard of militant feminism (seriously, do you lot ever actually read what you write?).
Society is still dominated by men- for example, it's different here in the UK but for you colonists look at the fight over abortion, or even contraception. The fact that it is even up for debate says a lot (and of course religion is a factor - but even that is patriarchal).
People bemoaning that female characters are included and are in positions of power, or not available as sexual conquests for a male character, or even that it is all some insidious plot (by men mostly! How does that work eh?) to emasculate men via a computer game really need to take a good, long hard look at themselves.
And then grow up.
|
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 12:28:16 GMT
I don't think the ratio of extremists to non-extremists is as high as you're suggesting unless your definition for extremist is "anyone who holds a view that is more extreme than my own." I certainly have my own disagreements with particular third wave feminist views and their proponents, but it's more about having different ways of conceptualizing how equality ought to be achieve than one side actually being against equality. Anyway, the main point is that third wave feminism isn't a fucked up monolith of people saying that women should be favored over men. I think the underlying goal and concept is still noble and the disagreements that are being had are more about how to achieve that common goal. Reading and listening to these types led me to a rather different conclusion than what you are describing here. Monolith or no, third wave feminism, and intersentional feminism ARE radical.
Misandry is quite common, and so is a general attitude that only cares about females. In short, this is an advocacy group that for the most part cares only about their own interests. Trying to masquerade as supporting equality is usually no more than a façade which is presented to outsiders.
I mean there's a very good reason why they like to denounce egalitarianism.
Have you held an actual conversation with these types? Well actually I guess that's a silly question since you're doing so right now. I won't claim to be particularly active in the movement but I do consider myself a feminist whose beliefs include concepts from the movement's third wave. I don't think it's particularly extreme to suggest that aspects of a person like their sex, gender, orientation, skin color, religion, and the combinations thereof might play a role in how certain policies affect them. Misandry I haven't found to be that common. I will agree with you on the bias towards addressing problems that women face over the ones that men face. But there are more people like me than you might realize. And even if you still want to consider feminism a special advocacy group, many of the things they advocate for are actual issues of equality. So it still isn't actually a bad thing. As for criticism of strict egalitarianism, I'm reminded of a quote that stuck with me from a gender studies lecture: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." |
|
inherit
Spirit talker
764
0
16,471
Giant Ambush Beetle
9,302
August 2016
giantambushbeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Giant Ambush Beetle on Mar 5, 2017 12:32:29 GMT
People bemoaning that female characters are included and are in positions of power, or not available as sexual conquests for a male character, or even that it is all some insidious plot (by men mostly! How does that work eh?) to emasculate men via a computer game really need to take a good, long hard look at themselves. And then grow up. I think the problem here is a healthy balance, not women in positions of power. Why are all top positions occupied by women? If it were the exact opposite I would ask why all top positions are occupied by men. Its kind of weird, and its a legit, serious question. Gravitating towards extremes is never good. |
|
inherit
3478
0
139
shepherdcommander
151
February 2017
shepherdcommander
|
Post by shepherdcommander on Mar 5, 2017 12:36:34 GMT
There is a stark difference between the "official" definition of feminism and the actual attitude among third wave feminists.
For the most part saying that feminism is merely about "equality" is a sad joke at this point. Feminism was taken over by extremists for some time now.
I don't think the ratio of extremists to non-extremists is as high as you're suggesting unless your definition for extremist is "anyone who holds a view that is more extreme than my own." I certainly have my own disagreements with particular third wave feminist views and their proponents, but it's more about having different ways of conceptualizing how equality ought to be achieve than one side actually being against equality. Anyway, the main point is that third wave feminism isn't a fucked up monolith of people saying that women should be favored over men. I think the underlying goal and concept is still noble and the disagreements that are being had are more about how to achieve that common goal. (A) says men and women are equal where men play role 1 and women play role 2, (  says they are equal when they both play role 3. yet as you pointed out their are fundamental biological and social differences that prevent one from playing the others role. this is not to say people are inflexible but there are obvious limitations. who would want to change things but those who feel victimized in their current roles? when one feels victimized one feels justified in standing up for oneself. are these feelings justified? given that people may feel how they feel and it is always justified the answer is yes. I don't know that I agree that women are victims, but if that is how they feel then it is true for them. I personally have felt victimized myself on several occasions, those feelings are not invalid. we are ultimately arguing what the proper course of action for those feelings are. an emotionally hurt victim perceives its environment changing in such a way as to give it power. a monkey chased by lion when suddenly a landslide knocks the lion down and a club falls into the monkeys hand. will the monkey strike the lion with its newfound power and with its previous victimization as its motivating force? the political field changes and women previously marginalized are now in position of power, moreso, they have the right and just cause of a victim to take from their perceived oppressors everything they have themselves lost. I think your quote makes my point: "" As for criticism of strict egalitarianism, I'm reminded of a quote that stuck with me from a gender studies lecture: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." "" so women are poor victims who have right to do things which for a man would be immoral because they have had to put up with some perceived problems not encountered by men. they had to jump a hurdle so it is okay for them to trip the man they are racing. p.s. these are just come things to think about, there may be other types of people besides victims who would want to change the status quo from 1/2 to 3, in which case the whole premise is flawed. its only one point that came to mind among others and i wont write so many pages atm. that is, i am not arguing but i am making arguments. |
|
inherit
303
0
Dec 26, 2017 16:36:01 GMT
6,009
dalinne
Vanguard of your destruction
1,724
August 2016
dalinne
|
Post by dalinne on Mar 5, 2017 12:43:37 GMT
Toyish Batphone , it means both, men and women, we must take responsability when we see unjustice. And we both, men and women, can be helped when unjustice and danger are upon us. So yeah, you are right in one part but at the same time it doesn't eliminate the responsability you have with other human beings. The difference is now the responsability is shared also with women, with all the good things and the bad things attached. Oh boy, don't. Normal people are no longer responsible for injustice, thats what we have law enforcement and judges for. Stepping out of line to do ''acts of justice can get you into serious trouble like jail or worse. Example: a person is getting beaten in some dark alley, you run to help them and you whack the attacker to make him stop, breaking his jaw. Next thing that is going to happen is the police will arrest the attacker AND you, and you will be on trial for assault and mayhem. If it turns out the attacker had a bad childhood and drug problems you are in serious trouble. And then it turns out the person who got beaten was his wife and she is mad at you for hurting her husband. The final result is you will be convicted for assault and mayhem, if the judge feels sympathetic you will only have to stay in prison for a couple of months, but you will have to pay your butt off for the medical bills of the attacker for the coming years. You will lose your old job because nobody wants a guy who has been convicted for assault and mayhem, and with that in your files you will never get a got job again. Your life is ruined, for a couple of seconds of justice, justice nobody even cares about. Shit like that happens all the time. If you see injustice, call the police and move along. In these times you will get punished for being a morally sound, just person and you will be rewarded for being a self-centered, careless bastard who does not give a shit about anyone. Calling the police is one of the multiple ways we have to stop unjustice. You don't need to be a fucking Batman to do something against unjustice. The problem is when you decide to do NOTHING when someone needs your help. If anyone is being assaulted, beaten or raped you have to act, but the way you act will depend on multiple factors: if you are alone or with more people, if you can call the police, if the attacker has a weapon, etc. |
|
inherit
Warning Points: 1
3116
0
Aug 28, 2024 23:38:02 GMT
8,041
vonuber
2,580
January 2017
vonuber
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by vonuber on Mar 5, 2017 12:48:28 GMT
I think the problem here is a healthy balance, not women in positions of power. Why are all top positions occupied by women? If it were the exact opposite I would ask why all top positions are occupied by men. Its kind of weird, and its a legit, serious question. Gravitating towards extremes is never good. Of course extremes are never good - but the point is it never was an issue for men when they were dominating. It's only when the status quo is being threatened that it's an issue. Disclaimer: I'm a guy. |
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 12:51:38 GMT
I don't think the ratio of extremists to non-extremists is as high as you're suggesting unless your definition for extremist is "anyone who holds a view that is more extreme than my own." I certainly have my own disagreements with particular third wave feminist views and their proponents, but it's more about having different ways of conceptualizing how equality ought to be achieve than one side actually being against equality. Anyway, the main point is that third wave feminism isn't a fucked up monolith of people saying that women should be favored over men. I think the underlying goal and concept is still noble and the disagreements that are being had are more about how to achieve that common goal. (A) says men and women are equal where men play role 1 and women play role 2, ( says they are equal when they both play role 3. yet as you pointed out their are fundamental biological and social differences that prevent one from playing the others role. this is not to say people are inflexible but there are obvious limitations. who would want to change things but those who feel victimized in their current roles? when one feels victimized one feels justified in standing up for oneself. are these feelings justified? given that people may feel how they feel and it is always justified the answer is yes. I don't know that I agree that women are victims, but if that is how they feel then it is true for them. I personally have felt victimized myself on several occasions, those feelings are not invalid. we are ultimately arguing what the proper course of action for those feelings are. an emotionally hurt victim perceives its environment changing in such a way as to give it power. a monkey chased by lion when suddenly a landslide knocks the lion down and a club falls into the monkeys hand. will the monkey strike the lion with its newfound power and with its previous victimization as its motivating force? the political field changes and women previously marginalized are now in position of power, moreso, they have the right and just cause of a victim to take from their perceived oppressors everything they have themselves lost. I think your quote makes my point: "" As for criticism of strict egalitarianism, I'm reminded of a quote that stuck with me from a gender studies lecture: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." "" so women are poor victims who have right to do things which for a man would be immoral because they have had to put up with some perceived problems not encountered by men. they had to jump a hurdle so it is okay for them to trip the man they are racing. p.s. these are just come things to think about, there may be other types of people besides victims who would want to change the status quo from 1/2 to 3, in which case the whole premise is flawed. its only one point that came to mind among others and i wont write so many pages atm. that is, i am not arguing but i am making arguments. I don't believe that only those victimized by the infairness of a system are the only ones who can point out its unfairness. This is actually one of the main areas of disagreement I've had with a lot of people in social justice movements. And as I said before, both men and women suffer some victimization at the hands of the current social milieu (this is what is commonly referred to as 'the patriarchy' though I hate using that term for it.) Past victimization can be cause for some degree of preferential treatment, but to what extent would be appropriate is a matter of debate. For instance, does the fact that there is a known and demonstrable bias against people with "black-sounding names" in selection for employment justify some affirmative action policies to counteract this bias? Ehhhh I'm on the fence about it. |
|
inherit
4092
0
Apr 27, 2017 11:19:21 GMT
34
salariansupremacist
27
March 2017
salariansupremacist
|
Post by salariansupremacist on Mar 5, 2017 12:57:52 GMT
I don't think the ratio of extremists to non-extremists is as high as you're suggesting unless your definition for extremist is "anyone who holds a view that is more extreme than my own." I certainly have my own disagreements with particular third wave feminist views and their proponents, but it's more about having different ways of conceptualizing how equality ought to be achieve than one side actually being against equality. Anyway, the main point is that third wave feminism isn't a fucked up monolith of people saying that women should be favored over men. I think the underlying goal and concept is still noble and the disagreements that are being had are more about how to achieve that common goal. Reading and listening to these types led me to a rather different conclusion than what you are describing here. Monolith or no, third wave feminism, and intersentional feminism ARE radical.
Misandry is quite common, and so is a general attitude that only cares about females. In short, this is an advocacy group that for the most part cares only about their own interests. Trying to masquerade as supporting equality is usually no more than a façade which is presented to outsiders.
I mean there's a very good reason why they like to denounce egalitarianism.
I'd be curious to know which feminist texts you've been exposed to that would give you this impression. Modern 'third wave' (or perhaps fourth wave, depending on how you choose to delineate things) feminists are the least violent and aggressive feminists in history. I'm talking here about western feminism, of course, there is a greater militancy involved in feminist movements in countries already wracked with political violence etc for obvious reasons. The general reason that 'egalitarianism' is denounced is not out of some misandric agenda, but rather for the same reason that 'all lives matter' is denounced. Essentially the word reorients the issue around an ideal that, although arguably noble, isn't practical on the level of tackling the problems in question. Just as 'all lives matter' obfuscates the issue of the unlawful execution of black men specifically, egalitarianism distracts from the fact that in most regards, it is still women that experience the majority of institutional sexism. Furthermore, it often transpires that even in the instances in which men are affected more harshly than women (sentencing disparity in court for example) the reasons are rooted in the intellectual ideas of feminism. As such, men can be served more effectively by tackling the issue through a feminist lens. To return to the example of sentencing disparity, research has shown that this can be rectified by increasing the proportion of female judges as they are less inclined to look upon female criminals with a paternalistic eye and give them sentences that match their male counterparts. I appreciate that it can be difficult to discuss issues such as these in the modern internet environment, but I assure you, feminism isn't the authoritarian boogeyman it is portrayed as and egalitarian notions are welcomed in the discussion, even if the word is disparaged somewhat. |
|
inherit
3478
0
139
shepherdcommander
151
February 2017
shepherdcommander
|
Post by shepherdcommander on Mar 5, 2017 13:04:45 GMT
(A) says men and women are equal where men play role 1 and women play role 2, ( says they are equal when they both play role 3. yet as you pointed out their are fundamental biological and social differences that prevent one from playing the others role. this is not to say people are inflexible but there are obvious limitations. who would want to change things but those who feel victimized in their current roles? when one feels victimized one feels justified in standing up for oneself. are these feelings justified? given that people may feel how they feel and it is always justified the answer is yes. I don't know that I agree that women are victims, but if that is how they feel then it is true for them. I personally have felt victimized myself on several occasions, those feelings are not invalid. we are ultimately arguing what the proper course of action for those feelings are. an emotionally hurt victim perceives its environment changing in such a way as to give it power. a monkey chased by lion when suddenly a landslide knocks the lion down and a club falls into the monkeys hand. will the monkey strike the lion with its newfound power and with its previous victimization as its motivating force? the political field changes and women previously marginalized are now in position of power, moreso, they have the right and just cause of a victim to take from their perceived oppressors everything they have themselves lost. I think your quote makes my point: "" As for criticism of strict egalitarianism, I'm reminded of a quote that stuck with me from a gender studies lecture: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." "" so women are poor victims who have right to do things which for a man would be immoral because they have had to put up with some perceived problems not encountered by men. they had to jump a hurdle so it is okay for them to trip the man they are racing. p.s. these are just come things to think about, there may be other types of people besides victims who would want to change the status quo from 1/2 to 3, in which case the whole premise is flawed. its only one point that came to mind among others and i wont write so many pages atm. that is, i am not arguing but i am making arguments. I don't believe that only those victimized by the infairness of a system are the only ones who can point out its unfairness. This is actually one of the main areas of disagreement I've had with a lot of people in social justice movements. And as I said before, both men and women suffer some victimization at the hands of the current social milieu (this is what is commonly referred to as 'the patriarchy' though I hate using that term for it.) Past victimization can be cause for some degree of preferential treatment, but to what extent would be appropriate is a matter of debate. For instance, does the fact that there is a known and demonstrable bias against people with "black-sounding names" in selection for employment justify some affirmative action policies to counteract this bias? Ehhhh I'm on the fence about it. I don't have my families original name. It was changed when we immigrated here. a name is given for your culture not your color. I can understand you being on the fence about that issue. for instance, and i dont tell this to many people especially online so feel humbled, I have a second name given for my second culture, akin to the Hanars' soul name, which I only use with (few) people of that culture. as far as non victims go: wherever I wrote "victim" you can pretty much put "one who perceives women to be victims" and I think I would mean that sentance as much as I meant the original. that is, I think people who feel women are victims would support them when they (perceived justifiably) stand up for themselves against their perceived opressors. (that also works the other way, "victims" was not another word for "women" in my OP, there were women even in that scenario which were not victims, i.e. women who do not believe that women are victimized) p.s. I think the proper course of action for treating victims would be to empower them, which is what the face of feminism is supposed to be, the problem then is that not everyone believes they are victims in need of empowering, some views hold they have as much power as men it is just a different kind, going back to the 1/2 and 3 thing, and empowering them further raises them above men. if two nations were previously equal, ill just say the US and China as random examples... US and china have trades, both of them ultimately gain from the trades but some industries in the US suffer and feel victimized while other industries get a huge boon, and the same for china, so there is some resentment but also some real good will. suddenly one has more power than the other, the US develops all kinds of space faring tech and pulls ahead. China has some real worries now, will the industries which were scorned by chinas trade deals now empowered to no longer need them turn to victimizing them and gain further advantage? in this analogy china is male and the US is female. again only 1 part of the much bigger story. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
3316
0
Nov 27, 2024 17:38:42 GMT
Deleted
0
Nov 27, 2024 17:38:42 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2017 13:26:49 GMT
I'm sorry for your Mother Issues.
|
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 13:30:21 GMT
I don't believe that only those victimized by the infairness of a system are the only ones who can point out its unfairness. This is actually one of the main areas of disagreement I've had with a lot of people in social justice movements. And as I said before, both men and women suffer some victimization at the hands of the current social milieu (this is what is commonly referred to as 'the patriarchy' though I hate using that term for it.) Past victimization can be cause for some degree of preferential treatment, but to what extent would be appropriate is a matter of debate. For instance, does the fact that there is a known and demonstrable bias against people with "black-sounding names" in selection for employment justify some affirmative action policies to counteract this bias? Ehhhh I'm on the fence about it. I don't have my families original name. It was changed when we immigrated here. a name is given for your culture not your color. I can understand you being on the fence about that issue. for instance, and i dont tell this to many people especially online so feel humbled, I have a second name given for my second culture, akin to the Hanars' soul name, which I only use with (few) people of that culture. as far as non victims go: wherever I wrote "victim" you can pretty much put "one who perceives women to be victims" and I think I would mean that sentance as much as I meant the original. that is, I think people who feel women are victims would support them when they (perceived justifiably) stand up for themselves against their perceived opressors. p.s. I think the proper course of action for treating victims would be to empower them, which is what the face of feminism is supposed to be, the problem then is that not everyone believes they are victims in need of empowering, some views hold they have as much power as men it is just a different kind, going back to the 1/2 and 3 thing, and empowering them further raises them above men. if two nations were previously equal, ill just say the US and China as random examples... US and china have trades, both of them ultimately gain from the trades but some industries in the US suffer and feel victimized while other industries get a huge boon, and the same for china, so there is some resentment but also some real good will. suddenly one has more power than the other, the US develops all kinds of space faring tech and pulls ahead. China has some real worries now, will the industries which were scorned by chinas trade deals now empowered to no longer need them turn to victimizing them and gain further advantage? in this analogy china is male and the US is female. again only 1 part of the much bigger story. This is why I think evidence-based policy making is so important. It doesn't matter whether you do or don't feel oppressed. The question is are you demonstrably oppressed in a way that can be resolved by changes to social policy? If so, those changes should be advocated for. Obviously there are still difficulties in evaluating whether any biases exist and figuring out how to effectively addres them. But approaching things scientifically and objectively would go a long way in making this kind of advocacy more compelling. Well...it should anyway. The state of climate change policy in the US kinda undermines that... |
|
inherit
3478
0
139
shepherdcommander
151
February 2017
shepherdcommander
|
Post by shepherdcommander on Mar 5, 2017 13:53:58 GMT
back to OP
AI's Founder, Creator and Leader: Jien Garson, id bang her with her helmet on... did we ever see her face?
-Director of Colonial Affairs: Foster Addison wish there were another pic of her but from the one, would bang
-Nexus Superintendent: Nakmor Kesh, BANG BANG BANG YES KROGAN
-Nexus Security: Sloane Kelley, crazy bdsm banging
-Main Virtual Intelligence: AVINA (female version) would mos def bang
-Squadmate: Pebee: out the airlock, wish she were tela vasir so i could bang her
-Second in comand of Ark Hyperion: Cora Harper: wont bang, needs moar hair for bang, or alternatively and ironically, less hair for crazy bdsm banging.
-Main medic inside the Tempest: Dr. Lexi T'Perro BANG BANG BANG
-Chief Science Offficer: Suvi: since I know nothing, she is kelly chambers, would bang again
-Squadmate: Vetra: female turian, tol, would bang
-Tempest Pilot: Kallo Jath: has cloaca, would bang
edit: uhh... are there any confirmed romances here? they are so much more promising than the squadmates...
edit2: since we are taking notice of the women in power, over in the romances and characters section there were recently posted three new male characters, a guy named fisher and two others, who all looked military. we havent seen too much military stuff in andromeda it would be interesting if it kind of got delineated like that, the civilian stuff we are attached to is largely run by females but the military is still largely male... it kind of makes sense if the military leadership is stretched thin and includes many of the men it would leave the women to take up the civilian duties. it doesnt seem like they are playing on the limited resources too much but it kinda makes sense to me.
|
|
inherit
3478
0
139
shepherdcommander
151
February 2017
shepherdcommander
|
Post by shepherdcommander on Mar 5, 2017 14:15:38 GMT
if anyone here thinks that women can do no harm... do you want to see what a country looks like when FEMINISTS have 100% control? I will tell you the name of a country run by women. you can then go do research on this country and come to real educated decisions. there are extremes that exist in this world we are always 1 second away from a different planet. you have to be careful what you wish for. you can get what you want RIGHT NOW and then realize it was all a big mistake. are you ready for the name of the country?
Brazil.
now go educate yourself.
EDIT: If you identify yourself as a feminist and are not educated about Brazil, that makes you Ignorant.
If you identify yourself as a feminist and do not want to educate yourself about Brazil, that makes you an Idiot.
If you identify yourself as a feminist and already know what is happening in Brazil, that makes you a bad person.
these are facts.
|
|
Wulfram
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
Origin: wulfram77
Posts: 493 Likes: 856
inherit
692
0
Nov 26, 2024 19:17:57 GMT
856
Wulfram
493
August 2016
wulfram
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
wulfram77
|
Post by Wulfram on Mar 5, 2017 14:24:09 GMT
People bemoaning that female characters are included and are in positions of power, or not available as sexual conquests for a male character, or even that it is all some insidious plot (by men mostly! How does that work eh?) to emasculate men via a computer game really need to take a good, long hard look at themselves. And then grow up. I think the problem here is a healthy balance, not women in positions of power. Why are all top positions occupied by women? If it were the exact opposite I would ask why all top positions are occupied by men. Its kind of weird, and its a legit, serious question. Gravitating towards extremes is never good. If you take the Mass Effect series as a whole, then Andromeda may well give us a healthy balance, since the human institutions were heavily dominated by men in the original trilogy. |
|
inherit
Spirit talker
764
0
16,471
Giant Ambush Beetle
9,302
August 2016
giantambushbeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Giant Ambush Beetle on Mar 5, 2017 14:40:37 GMT
I think the problem here is a healthy balance, not women in positions of power. Why are all top positions occupied by women? If it were the exact opposite I would ask why all top positions are occupied by men. Its kind of weird, and its a legit, serious question. Gravitating towards extremes is never good. If you take the Mass Effect series as a whole, then Andromeda may well give us a healthy balance, since the human institutions were heavily dominated by men in the original trilogy. And thats exactly the kind of thinking that makes the feminist movement appear so stupid and childish nowadays. Swapping one dominance with another isn't going to make people equal, balance isn't achieved by relying on extremes. |
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 14:40:44 GMT
Have you held an actual conversation with these types? Well actually I guess that's a silly question since you're doing so right now. I won't claim to be particularly active in the movement but I do consider myself a feminist whose beliefs include concepts from the movement's third wave. I don't think it's particularly extreme to suggest that aspects of a person like their sex, gender, orientation, skin color, religion, and the combinations thereof might play a role in how certain policies affect them. Misandry I haven't found to be that common. I will agree with you on the bias towards addressing problems that women face over the ones that men face. But there are more people like me than you might realize. And even if you still want to consider feminism a special advocacy group, many of the things they advocate for are actual issues of equality. So it still isn't actually a bad thing. As for criticism of strict egalitarianism, I'm reminded of a quote that stuck with me from a gender studies lecture: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." I object to identity politics. the notion that a person should be judged and given special dispensations according to race, skin color, or gender is abhorrent to me. It leads nowhere good.
Egalitarianism is about equality. FEMinism is about the advocacy of female interests.
Broadly speaking, females are equal in the eyes of the law in the west. There admittedly some cultural problems yet that prevents true equality, but that is hardly exclusive to females,
our society is not perfect, and males face problems specific to the male gender as well, from matters of longevity and suicide rates, to the fact that males are treated more harshly in court, to other matters.
Modern feminists, like other types of SJW, tend to focus on small issues and "micro aggressions" and blow them out of any reasonable proportion, if it's "manspreading", female representation in video games
(which is varied and nuanced these days), and other "crucial" problems.
They act as slacktivists and armchair rebels and enjoy the good life in the west, while ignoring for the most part REAL widespread problems such as female genital mutilation, or the hardcore misogyny
women in Islamic countries face, because to improve these issues would require more than ranting on Tumblr. Are you refering to just things like affirmative action or are you also including things like Women in Science advocacy and Black History Month? Because I wouldn't say there's anything abhorrent with taking a group whose contributions have been historically downplayed and spreading awareness of their accomplishments. You won't receive much pushback from me for the seceond paragraph. I agree that the issues you list are relatively minor (in the case of media representation) or made up (in the case of 'manspreading'). I'd say the former is worth some discussion because the media does play a surprisingly large role in self-perception. I actually see a hell of a lot from feminist groups on FGM and fucked up Islamic policies. But, really, those issues aren't ones that can be resolved by private groups. |
|
inherit
3478
0
139
shepherdcommander
151
February 2017
shepherdcommander
|
Post by shepherdcommander on Mar 5, 2017 14:48:21 GMT
I object to identity politics. the notion that a person should be judged and given special dispensations according to race, skin color, or gender is abhorrent to me. It leads nowhere good.
Egalitarianism is about equality. FEMinism is about the advocacy of female interests.
Broadly speaking, females are equal in the eyes of the law in the west. There admittedly some cultural problems yet that prevents true equality, but that is hardly exclusive to females,
our society is not perfect, and males face problems specific to the male gender as well, from matters of longevity and suicide rates, to the fact that males are treated more harshly in court, to other matters.
Modern feminists, like other types of SJW, tend to focus on small issues and "micro aggressions" and blow them out of any reasonable proportion, if it's "manspreading", female representation in video games
(which is varied and nuanced these days), and other "crucial" problems.
They act as slacktivists and armchair rebels and enjoy the good life in the west, while ignoring for the most part REAL widespread problems such as female genital mutilation, or the hardcore misogyny
women in Islamic countries face, because to improve these issues would require more than ranting on Tumblr. Are you refering to just things like affirmative action or are you also including things like Women in Science advocacy and Black History Month? Because I wouldn't say there's anything abhorrent with taking a group whose contributions have been historically downplayed and spreading awareness of their accomplishments. You won't receive much pushback from me for the seceond paragraph. I agree that the issues you list are relatively minor (in the case of media representation) or made up (in the case of 'manspreading'). I'd say the former is worth some discussion because the media does play a surprisingly large role in self-perception. I had to post this in response to what I saw you write. BHM is a joke, the punchline is too serious. |
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 15:22:13 GMT
Are you refering to just things like affirmative action or are you also including things like Women in Science advocacy and Black History Month? Because I wouldn't say there's anything abhorrent with taking a group whose contributions have been historically downplayed and spreading awareness of their accomplishments. I'm referring to equality of opportunity Vs. equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity is fine, encouraging more females to enter STEM sciences is fine, as long as that's what they actually want.
In this context equality of outcome means artificially raising the number of women in jobs that require STEM science education, despite the fact that there is a much smaller percentage of them there, or the fact that if you go by merit, these women won't achieve the same levels (because there are simply too few of them to begin with there). I'm mostly with you. But there is the argument that currently there isn't quite an equality of opportunity because of latent biases within the industry. That may or may not be the case (I haven't done the research myself) but in the event that it is, that would be an argument in favor of more policies that directly compensate for it. |
|
Banul
N1
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 30 Likes: 79
inherit
3893
0
79
Banul
30
Feb 25, 2017 17:26:15 GMT
February 2017
banul
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Banul on Mar 5, 2017 15:32:11 GMT
Upgrading to 9/10, well done.
Make it to page 10 and I'll give you full marks
|
|
inherit
3318
0
3,812
Psychevore
1,584
February 2017
psychevore
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by Psychevore on Mar 5, 2017 15:42:42 GMT
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Nov 27, 2024 16:25:55 GMT
9,679
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,062
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Mar 5, 2017 15:51:27 GMT
I'm glad someone's treating this topic with the respect it deserves.
|
|
amleth
N2
Posts: 231 Likes: 243
inherit
2241
0
Dec 16, 2018 22:17:42 GMT
243
amleth
231
December 2016
amleth
|
Post by amleth on Mar 5, 2017 16:02:59 GMT
Don't see a problem with it, I like a girl who knows how to take charge.
Also, seriously? This game has so many real problems but instead you choose to bitch about this? -.-
|
|
inherit
Reasonably Sane
585
0
3,694
DomeWing333
2,074
August 2016
domewing333
Dragon Age: Origins
|
Post by DomeWing333 on Mar 5, 2017 16:03:00 GMT
I'm mostly with you. But there is the argument that currently there isn't quite an equality of opportunity because of latent biases within the industry. That may or may not be the case (I haven't done the research myself) but in the event that it is, that would be an argument in favor of more policies that directly compensate for it. That's nice in theory, but how do we know that this is true? And if it's true in one place it hardly means that everywhere is similar.
The point is that the general push should be towards egalitarianism and general equality, because the feminists are not going to stop.
There's no point that signifies for them that "okay that's enough, we achieved what we needed to achieve" they would just continue pushing. You would hear arguments that since in the past men were dominant, it would be right for women to take their turn now.
This is why people refer to the extreme left and various SJW groups as "regressive", because they have regressed from classic liberal ideas of true equality and freedom of the individual into a new type of "progressive" authoritarianism.
Even today, in the west women are equal in practically everything. How many things are there that a woman can't do in the west? What sexism that does exists is merely on the individual level. Yet from the way many feminists talk, you would think that women in the west are forced to wear hijab and are flogged if they refuse, both of which are true by the way, just not in the west.
Wait, are there actually quotas in STEM and other fields? I was under the impression that it was just a social encouragement thing. Like I said, I do think general equality is the overall goal with differences mainly being how close we are to it and how we get closer. I'm of the opinion that we're pretty darn close but also that the steps to get closer are harder to pull off because social change is trickier than policy change. I wouldn't say sexism is just on an individual level. There are few instances on a political level, but there are group tendencies still in place. |
|
Wulfram
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
Origin: wulfram77
Posts: 493 Likes: 856
inherit
692
0
Nov 26, 2024 19:17:57 GMT
856
Wulfram
493
August 2016
wulfram
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
wulfram77
|
Post by Wulfram on Mar 5, 2017 16:37:11 GMT
If you take the Mass Effect series as a whole, then Andromeda may well give us a healthy balance, since the human institutions were heavily dominated by men in the original trilogy. And thats exactly the kind of thinking that makes the feminist movement appear so stupid and childish nowadays. Swapping one dominance with another isn't going to make people equal, balance isn't achieved by relying on extremes. If both men and women have an equal chance of being leaders, then there will inevitably be periods when either men or women appear to predominate. You need a decent sample size to see if there's a real bias going on. There being 4 high ranking women in the game isn't an "extreme". It only seems like one because our society still makes us expect leaders to be male by default. |
|
inherit
1544
0
Feb 25, 2021 11:56:07 GMT
2,466
Andrew Lucas
1,562
Sept 11, 2016 18:33:18 GMT
September 2016
andrewlucas
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Andrew Lucas on Mar 5, 2017 16:51:11 GMT
You say it with derision, but...good. The belief in gender equality is wholly compatible with opposing positive discrimination like "women first." It is wrong that men are often treated as inherently more disposable. Which isn't to say, "hooray" for not helping people, but "hooray for not determining whether to help people based solely on gender."  Amen, sister. Toyish Batphone , it means both, men and women, we must take responsability when we see unjustice. And we both, men and women, can be helped when unjustice and danger are upon us. So yeah, you are right in one part but at the same time it doesn't eliminate the responsability you have with other human beings. The difference is now the responsability is shared also with women, with all the good things and the bad things attached. I'm sure that writing a big text on Facebook isn't helping anyone. |
|
says they are equal when they both play role 3. yet as you pointed out their are fundamental biological and social differences that prevent one from playing the others role. this is not to say people are inflexible but there are obvious limitations. who would want to change things but those who feel victimized in their current roles? when one feels victimized one feels justified in standing up for oneself. are these feelings justified? given that people may feel how they feel and it is always justified the answer is yes. I don't know that I agree that women are victims, but if that is how they feel then it is true for them. I personally have felt victimized myself on several occasions, those feelings are not invalid. we are ultimately arguing what the proper course of action for those feelings are. an emotionally hurt victim perceives its environment changing in such a way as to give it power. a monkey chased by lion when suddenly a landslide knocks the lion down and a club falls into the monkeys hand. will the monkey strike the lion with its newfound power and with its previous victimization as its motivating force? the political field changes and women previously marginalized are now in position of power, moreso, they have the right and just cause of a victim to take from their perceived oppressors everything they have themselves lost. 
