Sign in to follow this  
jasondesante

So long, farewell

Recommended Posts

I think men are pressured by society to bottle up their emotions and act disaffected. So we let off steam by complaining about stupid crap.

dMbcOC5dS5k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think men are pressured by society to bottle up their emotions and act disaffected. So we let off steam by complaining about stupid crap.

That, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think men are pressured by society to bottle up their emotions and act disaffected. So we let off steam by complaining about stupid crap.

That, too.

Both sexes are, but this is one of the cases men have it worse than women. Due to social expectations, women aren't allowed to express themselves agresivly, but men aren't allowed to express themselves any way but aggressively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think men are pressured by society to bottle up their emotions and act disaffected. So we let off steam by complaining about stupid crap.

That, too.

Both sexes are, but this is one of the cases men have it worse than women. Due to social expectations, women aren't allowed to express themselves agresivly, but men aren't allowed to express themselves any way but aggressively.

Well said, and thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The game was always an experiment. If sales kept up (as they did with Minecraft and Prison Architect) then it would have grown and grown, but sadly they didn't -- so we get the limited version of the game.

And now WE'RE feeling that disappointment... thanks to Early Access. If Spacebase-DF9 had been developed privately, we'd just find this cool little space station simulator on Steam. Cool. But since we got to see all their hopes and dreams, some people are focussing on what ISN'T there.

This is the fundamental problem with Early Access in general, and it's got nothing to do with DF or Tim Schafer. Every EA game I've followed on Steam has these issues. If we'd never played the alpha version. If we'd never watched it grow from the spark of an idea. If we'd never read the developers hopes and dreams. We'd all just be taking what is about to be released entirely on its own merits.

The problem here is Early Access, not Tim Schafer, Double Fine, or ballooning budgets.

Thanks for posting this, guy I've seen on all tangentially LucasArts related forums for the last couple decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just found out TotalBiscuit is a putz and have a sad. : (

TB is fleeing forward, and it's visible.

He thinks that as long as he's attacking, he won't be attacked. It's a damn scary time for people like him. Existences are threatened by gamergate lynch mobs for no, absolutely no reason. Accidentally, he's been allowed to stand on the mob side, which is just a throw of a dice really, and he must not appear to stand anywhere else lest he be crushed.

I always liked TotalBiscuit. He IS good at what he's doing. But, yeah, he's scared to death and acts accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know. Even before all this I always considered TB to have alarmingly little insight for someone so influential. He claims honesty, and I think he probably is being honest in his own way, but unfortunately that way seems to be taking whatever he 'reckons' often based on shockingly little research, and then running with it to an audience of millions.

He's basically found a way of monetizing reckoning of this kind:

And well, nice work if you can get it - fair play to him, but it's probably not a great reason to pay attention to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think TB is going anywhere soon, unless the cancer gets him. In fact, he seems more popular than ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, people who complain about comic books are way funnier.

I legit saw a guy have a complete mental breakdown on GAF because the "T" and the "H" in the new Thor title were too far apart.

For reference, this is the title in question.

1412007956000-Thor-cover.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re. TBtweet

That Dani Landers though... WOW. My deepest respect. Need to look up that game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think men are pressured by society to bottle up their emotions and act disaffected. So we let off steam by complaining about stupid crap.

That, too.

Both sexes are, but this is one of the cases men have it worse than women. Due to social expectations, women aren't allowed to express themselves agresivly, but men aren't allowed to express themselves any way but aggressively.

Well said, and thank you.

I second this.

To me this is just an indicator that sexism 'about' women affects men too. So the assumptions made about women are: weak, emotional rather than logical, interested in frilly, frivolous things rather than complicated technical things, and all that. And those stereotypes generally work in a man's favour: he's (broadly speaking) seen as the strong, grounded type while there's a pressure for women not to be a part of that world. Which means that basically business, politics, sports, all these areas they still have to prove more to get the same level of respect (and even then, they tend to get paid less than people with the same jobs).

And what that means for sexism is that men are pressured not to be like that. Don't be weak, don't be emotional, don't be interested in cute or pretty things or overly concerned with personal appearance as these are -woman- things. And this of course is damagine, especially the part where men are under pressure not to pursue interests which are percieved as feminine, or show too much emotion.

So it definitely works both ways, but it's still a fact that even men growing up in a culture that encourages them to be emotionally stunted or shun the non-masculine, it's much easier for them to be successful in fields that reward that emotional stuntedness and masculinity (again, politics, business, etc) and those fields tend to place them in positions of power.

Sexist culture is something that negatively affects everyone, but also helps to preserve power structures that are (usually) pro-male.

Again, just talking generally here. Obviously there are various exceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One problem is that a lot of women want men to be manly in a very traditional sense. Until women start en masse going for men who are sensitive and emotional and otherwise in touch with their feelings, things aren't going to change any time soon.

Meanwhile, things will have to work in the traditional way:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One problem is that a lot of women want men to be manly in a very traditional sense. Until women start en masse going for men who are sensitive and emotional and otherwise in touch with their feelings, things aren't going to change any time soon.

It's the continuing series of...

'Things That Annoy Me'

#325,475,341 - Women who loudly proclaim, within earshot of myself when I'm sat on a train, minding my own business, that "all men are bastards!" No, you are attracted to bastards and choose to date them, whilst simultaneously ignoring the nicer men of this world. There's a difference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But on the other hand, some nice shy kid isn't terribly exciting to be with. The bastards at least have confidence. They'll be the ones asking women out. And a lot of women want to be asked out instead of having to do the asking. They expect the man to take the lead and be assertive and all that jazz. Being a bastard is just a character flaw that's fixable (pro tip: it's not).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But on the other hand, some nice shy kid isn't terribly exciting to be with. The bastards at least have confidence. They'll be the ones asking women out. And a lot of women want to be asked out instead of having to do the asking. They expect the man to take the lead and be assertive and all that jazz. Being a bastard is just a character flaw that's fixable (pro tip: it's not).

And hey, this is all bound up in the stuff I was talking about before. How assertive women are seen as pushy but assertive men are just seen as strong alpha males (again this is a generalisation but it's more or less true). So it would seem a bit mean to blame women for creating problems for themselves, when part of the reason many women are like this is because of the expectations the society (in which men have the majority of the power) has thrust on them. So it ends up being a self sustaining cycle unless people in the positions of power stick their neck out by taking an active stand against it. And that's rare, for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One problem is that a lot of women want men to be manly in a very traditional sense. Until women start en masse going for men who are sensitive and emotional and otherwise in touch with their feelings, things aren't going to change any time soon.

This is a thing that a lot of men say that, while true to a degree, isn't AS true as a lot of males think it is.

1) While physical attraction is definitely important to women, it's generally less important to them as it is to men. (Not to imply that "manly" only means in appearance.)

2) "Women are only attracted to manly jerks" is a sour grapes, nerds-vs-jocks sort of thing often said by one man about a few particular women he wanted but did not get.

3) "Women are only attracted to manly jerks"--to the extent that it DOES occur--it's important to keep in mind that women are super different and like different things. As are we all. It's also the case that this sort of "only interested in manliness" behavior is found more in girls than in women. But this is actually true of both sexes. When they are younger, both sexes are more promiscuous, less cautious, more slaves to their drives. As both sexes get older, other things become more important to them. This is true for men, but it often seems even more true for women (who, as I said, don't put as much emphasis on physical sexuality as men tend to do). For a lot of women, it's less important that you be "manly" and more important that you be "responsible" and "considerate" and "not a sex criminal" and "not a waste of their time" etc.

4) Trying to say that a lot of women being attracted to "manly men" is a problem is like saying that it's a problem that some guys are attracted to barbies. Yeah, that's true, but so what? What makes that a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4) Trying to say that a lot of women being attracted to "manly men" is a problem is like saying that it's a problem that some guys are attracted to barbies. Yeah, that's true, but so what? What makes that a problem?

The problem is that until there's demand for it, traditional ideas of masculinity aren't going to go away. And I don't have anything against "manly men" myself, btw. It's just an observation.

And hey, this is all bound up in the stuff I was talking about before. How assertive women are seen as pushy but assertive men are just seen as strong alpha males (again this is a generalisation but it's more or less true). So it would seem a bit mean to blame women for creating problems for themselves, when part of the reason many women are like this is because of the expectations the society (in which men have the majority of the power) has thrust on them. So it ends up being a self sustaining cycle unless people in the positions of power stick their neck out by taking an active stand against it. And that's rare, for obvious reasons.

Why is it mean? Women are not powerless agents in this system. Why shouldn't women take a part of the responsibility of how things are? Patriarchy is not maintained by men alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that until there's demand for it, traditional ideas of masculinity aren't going to go away. And I don't have anything against "manly men" myself, btw. It's just an observation.

Maybe I'm just unsure of what it is you're replying to. I think the existence of "manly men" and women who are attracted to them is just as fine as the existence of barbies and men who are attracted to them. It's expecting the entirety of one sex to conform to some particular "ideal" that would be at issue. I guess we have no disagreement then. As you were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, men and women all fall under the same umbrella; we're all human beings. We are all individuals and yet as far as gender goes; we're not in the least bit different to each other. It comforts people to think that there are sweeping differences. It allows for scapegoating.

Yet, we are all human beings. We all feel happiness and sadness. We all have aspirations, that for the most part, will go unfulfilled. We all dream and have nightmares; we are all capable of both love and hate. We all worry about how we come across to others. We are all desperate inside; clinging to the hope that we won't be forgotten about once we die and yet knowing deep down inside, that ultimately we will be. We all think on some level, that we are special; that we are somehow different to the vast majority. You're not; I'm not. We are all the same. We are all human beings.

Some people understand this fact, most don't (or rather they don't want to acknowledge it).

"Women say this"; "men do that". It's all complete garbage and I'm as guilty of it as the next person. People will never learn; there will always be discrimination, right up until the point when we, as a race, destroy ourselves. Ignorance will always reign supreme as long as there are human beings to peddle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just unsure of what it is you're replying to. I think the existence of "manly men" and women who are attracted to them is just as fine as the existence of barbies and men who are attracted to them. It's expecting the entirety of one sex to conform to some particular "ideal" that would be at issue. I guess we have no disagreement then. As you were.

I'm not aligned with the feminists who want to eliminate gender, if that's what you were thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just unsure of what it is you're replying to. I think the existence of "manly men" and women who are attracted to them is just as fine as the existence of barbies and men who are attracted to them. It's expecting the entirety of one sex to conform to some particular "ideal" that would be at issue. I guess we have no disagreement then. As you were.

I'm not aligned with the feminists who want to eliminate gender, if that's what you were thinking.

I'm an "equity feminist", but I am not a "gender feminist" either (i.e. I think it false the idea that we are all born blank slates and that gender is a 100% social construct).

Equity feminism is common sense. Gender feminism is truthiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who wants to eliminate gender?

I am in no doubt that there are feminists who want to do that, but I think a significant portion of feminists just wants everyone to be aware that gender is a social construct and that we shouldn't feel limited by traditional gender roles. I find it hard to disagree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would all change a lot more easily if parents would just let their kids be who they want to be instead of forcing them into playing with certain toys that are "okay" for them. When I was a little boy, I played with my older sister's barbies, I played with toy kitchen sets, I did a lot of crafting and beading with my mom, I played with Lego, I played with He-man, I played football, I was basically allowed to play with whatever I wanted, and that's how it should be for all children. Stop forcing your kids to conform to what you want them to play with, and just let them choose what they want to play with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an "equity feminist", but I am not a "gender feminist" either (i.e. I think it false the idea that we are all born blank slates and that gender is a 100% social construct).

Equity feminism is common sense. Gender feminism is truthiness.

Well, rejection of gender hierarchies is I think something that all feminists have in common (#yesallfeminists), but even a lot of the radical feminists want to keep at least some parts of gender. Even so, you don't have to go as far as Judith Butler's view of gender as a performance (which I personally find very interesting even if I don't really agree with her in all things) to see that gender in part is a social construct. This becomes really apparent if you look at history and how much variance masculinity/femininity has in different societies at different periods of time. For example, in some nomadic cultures women weren't even allowed to marry until they had killed someone and in Ancient Greece crying was not only accepted as normal for men, but even expected in some situations.

Who wants to eliminate gender?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postgenderism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who wants to eliminate gender?

I am in no doubt that there are feminists who want to do that, but I think a significant portion of feminists just wants everyone to be aware that gender is a social construct and that we shouldn't feel limited by traditional gender roles. I find it hard to disagree with that.

I agree. I must say that something that irritates me to no end are women who claim to want equality but at the same time want all of the niceties of a sexist society. By this I mean such things as expecting men to pay for dinner or to open doors for them. Look, I'll happily pay for a meal when I'm out on a date (for myself, it all comes down to whom asked who out in the first place) and I am more than willing to hold doors open for both women and men. I consider myself to be a chivalrous man but that's only because I choose to be, not because I'm expected to be (and as I previously mentioned; I'm this way towards both genders, not just the female members of society). Put simply, I hate this attitude of "equality for all, except when it suits me".

Equality is one of the very few things in life that is black or white. You can't pick and choose which aspects of sexism you want to retain. Either you're equal or you're not. It's as simple as that. On that note, I'm all for equality. Let's just lose this attitude that exists amongst a certain sector of the population that amounts to "you've got a penis, you should bend over backwards to please me because I'm in possession of a vagina" Of course the door swings both ways; I'm dead against men who think that a woman's place is in the kitchen and any and all other absurdities that fall into that line of thinking (as is sadly the case with my Sister's boyfriend).

It would all change a lot more easily if parents would just let their kids be who they want to be instead of forcing them into playing with certain toys that are "okay" for them. When I was a little boy, I played with my older sister's barbies, I played with toy kitchen sets, I did a lot of crafting and beading with my mom, I played with Lego, I played with He-man, I played football, I was basically allowed to play with whatever I wanted, and that's how it should be for all children. Stop forcing your kids to conform to what you want them to play with, and just let them choose what they want to play with.

I completely agree with this. As does Larry David, which made for a wonderful episode of 'Curb Your Enthusiasm'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's such a nice guy thing to say. Those individual women don't owe you a thing. They're allowed to think or say men are bastards, to be attracted to those qualities, they wouldn't necessarily be happier with the nice guys they're ignoring. They owe those men nothing, no one does, sex isn't a right, it's something two (or more) people should give to each other, willingly.

Oh, what complete and utter boulderdash! Of course it's their right to say such things (such is the nature of freedom of speech) but I also have every right to be offended by it. It's not like I said anything back to that woman. When she said those words; I was just quietly offended. By your logic, should a white person say "all black people are rotten to the very core", I would be in the wrong for taking offense.

As a male, I have every right to be offended when somebody says "all men are bastards". I mean, I'm a man so therefore in essence, in a roundabout way, that lady is calling me a bastard. She doesn't even know me! If she wishes to hold such an opinion, then so be it but must I be subjected to it when I'm commuting, trying to mind my own business? Perhaps the polite thing for her to do, would have been to keep her opinion to herself until she was in private company or at the very least, not shout it so that the whole carriage can hear! Who are you to say that I was wrong for taking offense at that?!

Let me ask you this; if you were sat by yourself on a train and a man said "all women are bitches", would you be offended? Would you think that it was an egregious thing for that man to have said, especially within ear shot of yourself? If the answer is yes, then I guess that makes you a hypocrite, huh?

You have every right to think that I'm the one who's out of order in taking offense and I have every right to think that you're out of order for thinking such a thing. Such is freedom of speech (and more importantly; freedom of thought) and such is the very crux of my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, rejection of gender hierarchies is I think something that all feminists have in common

All feminists have equity in common. They all reject double standards and demand equal access, etc. But they don't all think the gender is a 100% complete social construction.

There are certain ideas about gender that are absolutely socially constructed. It would be very difficult to argue this was not the case. But to assert in absolute terms that there are absolutely no statistically significant differences between males and females, generally speaking, is a hasty assumption made by many.

The idea that every person's brain is, at birth, the same little lump of play dough and only become "male-ish" or "female-ish" depending on what is done to it is not only not very well supported, but there is support that it is actually the other way: some things are just hard-wired, and male/female biochemistry might actually make some kind of psychological difference (albeit with huge variation; cf height).

I agree. I must say that something that irritates me to no end are women who claim to want equality but at the same time want all of the niceties of a sexist society. By this I mean such things as expecting men to pay for dinner or to open doors for them. Look, I’ll happily pay for a meal when I’m out on a date (for myself, it all comes down to whom asked who out) and I am more than willing to hold doors open for both women and men. I just hate this attitude of “equality for all, except when it suits me”.

I think it's possible to want one thing politically while wanting another thing in your intimate relationships. I don't think that necessarily implies any sort of self-contradiction. Like maybe I love when assertive women are really dominating toward me and want that in a relationship? Or maybe I like when women act all coy and demure and dig that in a relationship. But that doesn't necessarily mean I want all women to be like that. That's something I would talk about with my partner.

It would all change a lot more easily if parents would just let their kids be who they want to be instead of forcing them into playing with certain toys that are “okay” for them. When I was a little boy, I played with my older sister’s barbies, I played with toy kitchen sets, I did a lot of crafting and beading with my mom, I played with Lego, I played with He-man, I played football, I was basically allowed to play with whatever I wanted, and that’s how it should be for all children. Stop forcing your kids to conform to what you want them to play with, and just let them choose what they want to play with.

Thanks for bringing this up, Shodan. Kids toys is by far the most popular discussion among those who think that children are born blank slates and have a pre-defined gender of some kind thrust upon them. I think that can definitely be true, as certain gender-related ideas are socially constructed (e.g. boys like blue, girls like pink, boys like army men, girls like barbie, etc).

But if, as Shodan suggests, you just give your kid the toys he/she wants and let them play however they like, then you're not contributing to the problem. You're letting them be as they are.

Now, when you let that happen, possibly you will end up with a girl who thinks laser guns and G.I. Joes are awesome and easy bake ovens are boring. But it's ALSO possible you will end up with a girl who seriously genuinely just wants an easy bake oven.

The danger of "gender feminism" is what if you end up with a girl who seriously just wants an easy bake oven, but in your attempt to "protect her from society" and thrust "girl power" on her, you buy her G.I. Joe instead, even though that is not what she actually wanted? That's not fixing the problem. That's creating a new more complicated problem.

TLDR for this entire post: Talk/listen to your kids. Talk/listen to your partner. They'll tell you how they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's possible to want one thing politically while wanting another thing in your intimate relationships. I don't think that necessarily implies any sort of self-contradiction. Like maybe I love when assertive women are really dominating toward me and want that in a relationship? Or maybe I like when women act all coy and demure and dig that in a relationship. But that doesn't necessarily mean I want all women to be like that. That's something I would talk about with my partner.

It's something of a hot potato, politically speaking but I'm inclined to agree. My point was more leveled towards encounters with strangers, or at least people with whom one is not overtly familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's possible to want one thing politically while wanting another thing in your intimate relationships. I don't think that necessarily implies any sort of self-contradiction. Like maybe I love when assertive women are really dominating toward me and want that in a relationship? Or maybe I like when women act all coy and demure and dig that in a relationship. But that doesn't necessarily mean I want all women to be like that. That's something I would talk about with my partner.

It's something of a hot potato, politically speaking but I'm inclined to agree. My point was more leveled towards encounters with strangers, or at least people with whom one is not overtly familiar with.

But if they are strangers you're not familiar with, how do you know their opinions on feminism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this