Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
Sign in to follow this  
Bango

#gamergate

Recommended Posts

Heh.. I learned the term "feminazi" from Mad magazine... where they promptly apologized for offending any nazis ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh.. I learned the term "feminazi" from Mad magazine... where they promptly apologized for offending any nazis ^_^

 

And since this thread has now accomplished Godwin's Law, which violates the #1 forum rule, it should be closed.  I'm offended.

 

Either that, or I'm calling out the mods for a humiliating failure to do their jobs.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SchymanSchyman.jpg

"All men are talibans"

Edit:

Pictured is Gudrun Schyman, who I cannot call anything but a feminazi, and the people in her party are not feminists, they are feminazis.

Vroomie will back me up on this.

Consider yourself backed up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we can call people nazi's now on this forum? Good to know. Weren't some people from Europe not liking this?

 

Or we need to edit the forum rule to say "you are only allowed to call feminists nazis"?

 

____________________________

 

Seriously, I don't personally mind the term, even though I disagree with labeling feminists as nazis. But I am in the US, where words like grammar nazi has become more common. As Aldor would say, though: "Follow the rule!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is debatable, since people are calling feminists nazi's. 

 

People on these forums in the past objected to the use of nazi's this way, and the mods stepped in. 

 

Ultimately, Doro is using the term feminazi to discredit all feminists. If Doro was a real man he would debate the points and not label a large group of people as extremist to make his arguments. Making fun and ridiculing people is not necessary and is in bad taste IMO. And yes the "real man" part is a feminist joke.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately, Doro is using the term feminazi to discredit all feminists. If Doro was a real man he would debate the points and not label a large group of people as extremist to make his arguments. Making fun and ridiculing people is not necessary and is in bad taste IMO. And yes the "real man" part is a feminist joke.

 

Every time you post, you entirely misrepresent what I've said. Either you're just being a dishonest cunt (as Las has already pointed out), or you're just a moron. Could be both, so I won't rule that out either.

 

I've told you time and again that they don't make any valid points to even warrant a debate in the first place. If they did, I wouldn't need to debate it because it would be a valid fucking point. Anyone with a brain would know that. And I've made it clear the distinction between feminazis (no, not nazis, feminazis) and actual feminists. So your constant need to try to twist what I say as if I'm applying it to all feminists, which I am clearly not, is just showing me the sort of person you are: a feminist joke.

 

Signed, a real man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is debatable, since people are calling feminists nazi's.

no, they're not calling feminists Nazis, they're calling feminazis Nazis, feminazis are a minority of feminists that work to an agenda that doesn't conform to true feminism, they basically aggressively defend a position that has no room for debate or argument, they refuse to discuss a point and instead try to force their own views onto others, they are feminists that take things too far and give other feminists a bad name, even some feminists call these people feminazis.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I've made it clear the distinction between feminazis (no, not nazis, feminazis) and actual feminists. So your constant need to try to twist what I say as if I'm applying it to all feminists, ...

 

How did you decide Sarkeesian is not an actual feminist?

 

Anita Sarkeesian (/sɑrˈkziən/; born c. 1984) is a Canadian-American feminist, media critic and blogger

Her blog has also been utilized as material for university-level women's studies courses, and she has spoken at universities on the topic of female characters in pop culture. In March 2012, Sarkeesian and her blog were listed in the journal Feminist Collections's quarterly column on "E-Sources on Women & Gender".

 

Sarkeesian is basing her points on standard feminist theory:

 

"the negative impacts of sexual objectification have been studied extensively over the years and the effects on people of all genders are quite clear and very serious. Research has consistently found that exposure to these types of images negatively impacts perceptions and beliefs about real world women and reinforces harmful myths about sexual violence."

 

She is generally considered by feminists and many non-feminists to be a feminist - and not a particularly extreme feminist. But Doro, I am glad you know better than other feminists and can tell us how she is not a feminist but a feminazi.

 

This person offers a different perspective: http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/31/tropes-vs-women-in-video-games-why-it-matters

 

It is possible to make the point you disagree with Sarkeesian without demonizing her, or using ad hominem attacks. But somehow you can't do that. I am just pointing that out. By the way, Rush Limbaugh used (and made popular) the term "feminazi" to discredit feminist activists Gloria SteinemSusan SarandonChristine Lahti, and Camryn Manheim.  It is quite a joke to call them extreme, militant feminists. 

no, they're not calling feminists Nazis

 

Sorry, man. That is exactly that they are doing. Seriously.  

They are labeling people who are feminists as feminazis. If you looked in to who these people are, you would see they are widely considered feminists.

 a minority of feminists that work to an agenda that doesn't conform to true feminism

 

This is laughable. Please tell me how Sarkesian's views do not conform to "true feminism". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Care to show me one quote from you where you make this distinction?

And yet you feel you're such an authority to summarise what I'm supposedly saying without reading what I've even said.

Edit: Wow, editing your post to try to pretend you didn't fuck up. Good work.

And how did you decided Sarkeesian is not a feminist?

Multiple things. Her constant production of shitty videos creating false problems (how Hitman is a game designed only to fulfil fantasies of killing women), ignoring any legitimate criticism but pointing only at trolls making threats (she goes to conferences all the time and repeats her refuted points and uses a handful of trolls as a basis for the behaviour of all men), incessant posting on Twitter that can turn any event into some problem with men (see the recent school shooting now being due to 'toxic male culture'), her lying in order to make money (started a Kickstarter claiming to be a gamer who loves games, but said in another video that she hadn't even played games and didn't like them).

Go watch Thunderf00t's videos on her and then get back to me. That is, if you can handle a woman actually being criticised without going into meltdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be confused with actual feminists.

 

And yet I bet you cannot even name one "actual feminist". Seriously, I dare you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe, (Doro) you are referring to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afgtd8ZsXzI

 

also, feminazi is a really dumb term.

 

and it is pretty much unilaterally rejected by ALL feminists...  whether sex positive, or sex negative...  Liberal,  Anarchist, or Socialist/Marxist...  post modern, or even trans-feminism.

 

bottom line; Feminism is an umbrella term.  a suitcase of causes; often at cross purposes.

 

i support & endorse the full person-hood & liberty of ALL people, including women, to pursue happiness.

 

i would oppose any attempt to revoke women suffrage.

 

a full person is equal in the eyes of the law & has the right to be represented as such.

 

that said...  a large portion of this 3rd wave of feminism is utter rot.  utter rot.

 

and even Anita Sarkeesian is beginning to distance herself from Brianna Wu, because even though they both claim the label Feminist.  there are subtle, but distinct differences between what they are saying.

 

reluctant linkage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykxyHystj2c

 

and lastly, this antiquated Victorian ideal, that women are eggshells and can't be approached without a formal introduction, and can't be engaged in debate, etc.  that women should cloister amongst their own kind, or be infantilized, or somehow not treated as a full person & adult...  yeah, not a supporter of any of that, either.

 

EDIT: one more vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee8RgbS9ESE

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, man. That is exactly that they are doing. Seriously.

They are labeling people who are feminists as feminazis. If you looked in to who these people are, you would see they are widely considered feminists.

No, they're not. Think of it this way, it's like the difference between a protestor and a terrorist that base their beliefs on the same subject, they both represent the same goals but they both have wildly different ways of achieving them, one is a feminist the other is a feminazi masquerading as a feminist.

 

This is laughable. Please tell me how Sarkesian's views do not conform to "true feminism".

The way that it is intentionally produced top incite anger and hate, the way it blows the situation way out of proportion, the way it edits in or out parts to sway the viewer towards his/her own viewpoint, the overly aggressive way in which it is implemented and introduced to the public, and much much more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet I bet you cannot even name one "actual feminist". Seriously, I dare you.

Off the top of my head, Germaine Greer, Joss Whedon (yeah, a man), Emma Watson, Angelina Jolie and Christina Hoff Sommers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go watch Thunderf00t's videos on her and then get back to me. That is, if you can handle a woman actually being criticised without going into meltdown.

 

Thunderf00t, the Holocaust apologist?  That's who you're choosing to side with and cite?

 

http://www.gezone.net/en/videos/play/U0ZiOVJRNWFmeFU

 

Thunderf00t, the rape apologist and misogynist?

 

http://somegreybloke.blogspot.com/2013/09/thunderf00t-has-decided-to-talk-about.html

 

Cool source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thunderf00t, the Holocaust apologist?  That's who you're choosing to side with and cite?

 

http://www.gezone.net/en/videos/play/U0ZiOVJRNWFmeFU

 

Thunderf00t, the rape apologist and misogynist?

 

http://somegreybloke.blogspot.com/2013/09/thunderf00t-has-decided-to-talk-about.html

 

Cool source.

Wow.

First, let me just say your point is retarded. Whatever his belief in one thing, it does not mean you disregard EVERYTHING.

Second, both your points are basically lies. He does NOT make excuses for the Holocaust. If you had even watched his video, they were discussing morality and difficult choices in that if you had the power to take away the science that allowed the Holocaust to happen, would you do so knowing that in the future 2 billion people would have been saved by the same technology. So the whole clip is out of context.

He doesn't even make excuses for rape, nor is he a misogynist. His video about rape was about the idea of 'teach men not to rape' being fucking retarded. This is something the vast majority of us KNOW is wrong. It doesn't need to be taught. Neither should women act like it is outside the realm of possibility. It's a very real threat and it is in your best interest to take steps to avoid it. Just as you lock your door at night to prevent being robbed, it is a wise idea to not walk alone at night down a dark alley.

Third, seriously what the fuck? Do you even look into what you link before you do so or are you just trying to misrepresent what people say for your own purposes? Actually watch his videos and get an idea of what he says, not what someone else claims he says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a fascinating field study in how social structures devolve once the caveman percentage reaches a critical mass.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWfU18boOI

 

Think you are looking for Barbarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

First, let me just say your point is retarded. Whatever his belief in one thing, it does not mean you disregard EVERYTHING.

Second, both your points are basically lies. He does NOT make excuses for the Holocaust. If you had even watched his video, they were discussing morality and difficult choices in that if you had the power to take away the science that allowed the Holocaust to happen, would you do so knowing that in the future 2 billion people would have been saved by the same technology. So the whole clip is out of context.

He doesn't even make excuses for rape, nor is he a misogynist. His video about rape was about the idea of 'teach men not to rape' being fucking retarded. This is something the vast majority of us KNOW is wrong. It doesn't need to be taught. Neither should women act like it is outside the realm of possibility. It's a very real threat and it is in your best interest to take steps to avoid it. Just as you lock your door at night to prevent being robbed, it is a wise idea to not walk alone at night down a dark alley.

Third, seriously what the fuck? Do you even look into what you link before you do so or are you just trying to misrepresent what people say for your own purposes? Actually watch his videos and get an idea of what he says, not what someone else claims he says.

 

Not a rape apologist?  Here's an article with a partial transcript from one of his videos (i.e., what he says), and the author's response to thunderf00t's points.

 

http://skepchick.org/2013/10/thunderf00t-and-wasps-and-mountain-lions-and-rape/

 

(tl;dr version: Thunderf00t claims that fewer women would be raped if they'd just channel their inner wasp and fight back against a predator.  He should know - he was stalked by a mountain lion once, didn't act like prey, and survived to tell about it!

 

How does this make him a rape apologist?  Because he's using the exact same language as actual rapists did when explaining why they raped the women they did: namely, that the women didn't do enough to convey that they didn't want to be raped.)

 

As for the holocaust science - what technology that was used in the Holocaust later saved 2 billion people?  That wasn't at all clear in the video.

 

Oh, and regarding this part at the start:

 

First, let me just say your point is retarded. Whatever his belief in one thing, it does not mean you disregard EVERYTHING

 

That's laughable coming from you, considering that you're completely unwilling to even acknowledge Sarkessian's (or Felicia Day's, or apparently any women who mentions misogyny in the tech industry or underrepresented women in games) points based on your tautology that she's a "feminazi".

 

If I am guilty of ignoring everything Thunderf00t says - even though I'm only aware of a small fraction of what he said - I'm certainly more comfortable with ignoring the views of Johnny "hey, the Holocaust might not've been so bad because science inexact future hypothetical"  than I would be ignoring the views of Sally "women face a fair bit of discrimination in the tech industry and games".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a rape apologist?  Here's an article with a partial transcript from one of his videos (i.e., what he says), and the author's response to thunderf00t's points.

 

http://skepchick.org/2013/10/thunderf00t-and-wasps-and-mountain-lions-and-rape/

 

(tl;dr version: Thunderf00t claims that fewer women would be raped if they'd just channel their inner wasp and fight back against a predator.  He should know - he was stalked by a mountain lion once, didn't act like prey, and survived to tell about it!

More misrepresentation. I'm starting to see a pattern here.

 

How does this make him a rape apologist?  Because he's using the exact same language as actual rapists did when explaining why they raped the women they did: namely, that the women didn't do enough to convey that they didn't want to be raped.)

Yes, because stating methods of helping protect women is blaming them for being raped. Just like those idiots who got upset by the nail polish that changed colours when in contact with date-rape drugs, you're completely missing the actual point.

His problem was how he went about saying it, which meant that people incapable of understanding metaphors were left thinking they were a bee.

Edit: I only just spotted that it was Rebecca Watson who wrote that nonsense. Enough said on that, really.

 

As for the holocaust science - what technology that was used in the Holocaust later saved 2 billion people?  That wasn't at all clear in the video.

Of course it wasn't. The video was originally much longer than that tiny 2 minute chunk. He's referring to the scientific application of nitrogen that feeds people with the use of fertilisers also being used in various weapons used during WW2.

 

That's laughable coming from you, considering that you're completely unwilling to even acknowledge Sarkessian's (or Felicia Day's, or apparently any women who mentions misogyny in the tech industry or underrepresented women in games) points based on your tautology that she's a "feminazi".

Stop being so fucking dense. I dismiss their whines AFTER I have listened to them, not because of who they are but for what they have said. If they say something of value, I'm hardly going to dismiss it. It's no surprise the two strongest supporters of feminazis in here are also the most incapable of reading or even forming a basic argument without twisting what other people have said. 

 

If I am guilty of ignoring everything Thunderf00t says - even though I'm only aware of a small fraction of what he said - I'm certainly more comfortable with ignoring the views of Johnny "hey, the Holocaust might not've been so bad because science inexact future hypothetical"  than I would be ignoring the views of Sally "women face a fair bit of discrimination in the tech industry and games".

But those aren't the options. You've made a false dilemma to back up your retarded point. Your attempt to dismiss what Thunderfoot says is based on a lie. So how about you stop hiding behind what idiots say about other people and actually look at what they've said themselves? I know, I know, it won't fit your existing bias and it might upset you, but it may actually make you think for even a second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose in this day and age, it's only ok for Men to have their ideas/opinions challenged without it being called net-hatred or personal attacks.

Or it's only wrong when those misguided morons with male genitalia hate all women.

 

Bringing up my earlier point about the Feminist Initiative party in Sweden. Prior to the election, I found a website where a lot of their members/supporters were tweeting their hatred of what they call "white CIS men", but I suppose there's nothing wrong with that picture at all. I didn't see a word about hating men of other skin-colours. But that's ok as well, in this day and age. We have a Deputy Prime Minister who during a speech at the annual political week at Almedalen stated how "we in the Green Party hate white middle-aged men", but that's also ok. Considering that it's ok for this Environmental Minister/Deputy PM to violate several Environmental Laws and not get booted out of Government, that's just par for the course of the BS that is this day and age.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...