“Hatred and anger are power,” and other thoughts on women and gaming from Spearheaders
Evil incarnate
Over on The Spearhead, W.F. Price celebrates the harassment directed at Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes Against Women video project as a sign of a powerful new backlash against the evils of feminism, a backlash he’s proud to be a part of. Dudes being obnoxious to a woman on the internet: Men’s Rights at its finest.
Oh, sure, Price acknowledges, some of the attacks on her were “juvenile” – and thus not as effective as they might otherwise have been — and the controversy did enable Sarkeesian to raise more than $130,000 for her project, but Price even sees this as a victory of sorts:
As for Sarkeesian’s success, we should be happy about it, because I can’t think of a more worthless way to spend over a hundred thousand dollars than in finger-wagging over video games. For one thing, it’s sure to piss even more guys off, and the game industry is very competitive, so her documentary (now expanded to 12 parts!) will likely have zero effect on production and consumption of this form of entertainment. The feminists are simply pissing all the money away, and that’s fine, because this time they’re paying for it themselves.
No question about it: those grapes were definitely sour.
Naturally, the Spearhead regulars were overjoyed by these new signs of, er, progress. Here are some highlights from the discussion that followed; lest I be accused once again of cherry-picking outliers, each and every one of the comments I quote below got literally dozens of net upvotes. This is what these guys really think.
Mojo offers a sort of backlash manifesto:
Feminists will never understand that it is -they- who are the oppressors. They cling to their delusion that they are the ‘underdog’ against the system, even as they control the system.
Revolution requires an enemy class to attack … this is seen as justified when the enemy class controls the system. But feminism is perpetual revolution. So what happens when they gain control over the system? They continue to attack the enemy class, i.e. men, thinking they are striking the next blow against the patriarchy, when what they are doing is more like a pogrom.
Yep, he went there.
Now -they- are the system, they are able and more than willing to intimidate, humiliate, expropriate. It will get indefinitely worse if they have their way. Liberal feminism leads -necessarily- to radical feminism.
Still, we don’t need feminists to ‘understand’ that they are the persecutors (I imagine some of them know this full well and are just misandrist sadists, little Eichmanns). It doesn’t matter what they think or know or understand. What matters is what -we- think, know and understand, and how we are going to act on it.
So … like the swivel-eyed feminist lunatics progressing from attempted assassinations to laying the foundations for institutional and legal abuse … I ask you – what are we going to DO with this knowledge and awareness beyond changing online discourse? …
Thinking like a leftist, though: why not attach ourselves to the GOP in order to subvert its gender politics and radicalize it in the MRA direction? That kind of approach has worked wonders for leftists and their infiltrations into public institutions …
Huh. Reactionary anti-feminists attaching themselves to the Republican Party? No one’s ever thought of that before.
Keyster offers some equally, er, innovative thinking:
Feminism has failed because women as a group adopted the notion of “equality” with men, while stubbornly clinging to their sexual/reproductive power over men. Had feminism truly helped women “realize their greatness”, there’d be far more great women. Instead there’s just more feminists. It’s run it’s course over 3 generations and it’s out of time to prove itself righteous.
The original “male chauvanist pigs” of the early 70′s, were right all along. Women are biologically and chemically ill-equipped to be men. If the Creator had meant women to be more like men, he wouldn’t have given them the ability to bring forth life from their bodies.
Ryu not only embraces the backlash, but seems perfectly fine with the notion that the Men’s Rights movement is a hate movement:
Good. Hatred and anger are power. Whenever you hear someone say “stop the hate”, it is a call to throw down your greatest weapons.
Young Guy purports to speak for all young guys (manginas presumably excepted):
If feminists think men, especially young men, are angry, they don’t know the half of it. As a 26 year-old male, I have seen this society bend over backwards to accommodate women all the time.
The school curriculums are geared toward female success. Schools have countless women’s programs. Female teachers can be as hateful as they want towards male students without facing consequences. People cheer when girls succeed in school, but jeer when boys succeed in school. Even though females have every advantage in the education system, they somehow still have the audacity to complain. They take fluff majors but don’t realize anyone with less than half a brain could pass classes in the humanities and social sciences.
What makes so many MRAs such proud yahoos?.
Oh, and just look at the workplace. Sexual harassment laws give women freedom to dress slutty and still have the nerve to complain when men sneak a peek. If you are a man who has a female co-worker, you have to walk on eggshells everyday or else you can get fired because the twat in the other room got her panties in a bunch over something minor you said. You can be a man who has busted his ass everyday to succeed in your chosen profession, only to see it mean nothing because some woman who was nothing more than an affirmative action hire. If this isn’t bad enough, you get these useless women who are subpar, yet they still never shut up about breaking through the mythical glass-ceiling that they didn’t break and didn’t exist in the first place.
Working men, forever cursed by subpar women.
Also, I have really had enough of women dragging this country down with their dead-weight. Female soldiers, police officers, and firefighters are liabilities. No, all you ladies in these jobs, you aren’t heroes. I am going to go insane if I hear one more female soldier, police officer, or firefighter cry about not getting the respect she thinks she deserves. She doesn’t get respect because she doesn’t deserve respect. The military, law enforcement, and firefighters would be A LOT better off if women stopped lowering the bar to astronomical proportions.
“Lowering the bar to astronomical proportions?” Young Guy here has clearly not yet mastered the fine art of metaphor.
He blabs on a bit longer before wrapping up with:
The backlash is not only real, but it is well-deserved. Apologies won’t erase the damage which has been done. Acting like what happened because of feminism either didn’t happen or was minor is a slap in the face. Saying women have suffered from feminism just as much as men is like spitting in the faces of all the men who have suffered ten lifetimes of pain because of feminism.
Not one, not two, not five, but ten lifetimes of pain? MRAs really are the world’s greatest drama kings.
Andrew S., meanwhile, seems a little confused as to what feminists would like to see happening in the video game industry:
It will be interesting to see if feminists can ruin the gaming industry like they ruin pretty much everything else. There is a lot of money being made off “gamers,” and even guys like me who play the occasional game but aren’t hardcore contribute a lot of money to the industry.
I doubt there are a lot of young guys and men out there who are going to want to play games that involve a bunch of screaming feminists, and where the object of the game is to destroy the “evil patriarchy.” The truth is guys who play games want their female characters to be either hot, large breasted, ass kicking types, or sexy non-feminist types that you save. If the gaming industry changes this dynamic to much due to Feminist/liberal pressure they will destroy a cash cow. And feminism will have yet another “victory.”
Unrestricted and uncriticized access to giant tittied video game ladies: a sacred men’s right!
Kevin evidently speaks for many when he says he wants video games to remain a boys club:
Video games are pretty much the only place that feminism can’t invade unless the principle consumers of them want it. You don’t have to play with girls, or listen to girls, or do other pansy shit. You probably can’t leave a football team and join a different one that has no women, you sure as hell can do that online. Don’t like all the teamwork talk? Play by yourself.
Feminists don’t like video games because; they can’t make them, they can’t force you to buy them or play them even if they did, they couldn’t ruin the experience for you unless you wanted them to.
You can do anything feminists don’t want you to do, and best of all you’re rewarded for it.
Anonymous Age 70 doesn’t even play video games, but he was pleased to learn that you can shoot ladies in them:
Speaking of video games, I am reminded of my son 8 or 10 years ago. I visited him, and he had some kind of shoot-em-up video game. He was partnered with a dearie, and the instant the game started, he always put a bullet in the middle of her forehead. Then, he’d laugh as if it were the funniest thing ever.
I told him he was a sick man, but I was also laughing as if it were the funniest thing ever.
Seriously, he told me he performed better with her dead than needing to be protected.
A great analogy for marriage 2.0, yes?
Women, can’t live them, can’t shoot them in the head. Except in video games!
Criticizing video games is misandry!
Posted on June 27, 2012, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 670 Comments.
I generally only have the tv on in the background because i’m watching stuff on YouTube or playing games (good use of resources there, sorry about destroying the planet :( ), but I usually have it on something like CSI or NCIS (the latter of which is at top of my stuff-that’s-not-sci-fi favourites list), when there’s nothing sci fi-related (like Star Trek) on.
Both arguably have strong/smart, masculine men in charge and involved.
Though if I may activate Feminist Mode for a moment, both still have a good mix of awesome male and female characters. And for a good chunk of time, in the case of NCIS, the director of the organisation was female (and awesome). The current director of NCIS is non-white even! Tis an awesome show.
The wives of the bumbling dads are always shown to be boring nags, too, if they dare ask the dad to be more helpful or responsible. They’re also conventionally good looking. The message shown to straight women is “You have to be hot and you have to put up with an irresponsible partner”. I don’t see how it’s misandry to show an average looking guy married to a supermodel, and he can be silly and fun all the time while she picks up the slack for him.
By the way ACLAF, it’s more than a little ironic that you came here to A) Announce how wonderful it is to freed of the burden of being emotional; and B) Complain about television hurting your feelings.
My radical opinion is that sitcoms have crap gender politics every which way, and that it sucks *both* to be considered a useless, stupid slob and to be expected to take care of a useless, stupid slob.
@ AFLAC or whatever your name is-
You should try practicing being manly with video games! If you choose an MMO it helps to send a lot of pm’s to female players asking if they will suck your dick. While making you a sammich. That one never gets old and women really will think you’re the smartest, dudliest dude ever.
It’s true. Go ahead, give it a try. Let us know how it works out.
AFLAC, your biases were going to be reinforced no matter what by coming here, so stop whining. Your fellows in the MRM do more gender policing than feminism does.
Frankly, I think you’re lying about everything.
The video game industry would be just fine without damsels in distress and female characters with obnoxiously large breasts. And good for Anita for raising $130,000. More power to her.
@Cliff:
“The “bumbling father, long-suffering mother” trope always said to me: “men should be loved and tolerated no matter what irresponsible nonsense they get up to. It’s women’s job to clean up after them.”
Because the full trope is always “bumbling but beloved father,” and not a lot of bumbling mothers get extended that forgiveness.”
THIS. SO. MUCH.
I REALLY have a problem with those Simpson episodes where the big MORAL of the ep is that Marge has such a great love for Homer that she’ll love him no matter what and their marriage is therefore so beautiful etc. SHE SHOULD FUCKING DIVORCE HIM! You’re NOT a saint for putting up with a completely useless idiot husband who treats you like a doormat!
I actually have less of a problem with Family Guy, since that show doesn’t take itself seriously at all, while the Simpsons seem to believe that they have some beautiful lessons to teach the audience together with the laughs.
I love American Dad, but that isn’t quite the bumbling father trope in the same way as the others. The big joke with Stan is that he’s conservative, not that he’s stupid. Plus Francine has been allowed to completely freak out a few times. (Wait, I just realized as I’m typing this that Haley is explicitly a feminist AND the least messed-up person in the family – that proves it! Feminists DO run these shows!)
I love how ACLAF has morphed into AFLAC :)
@Shaenon
“In what ways does feminism discourage men from being “masculin, manly, powerful, strong, smart, fast etc.”?
Feminism discourages men from being overtly masculine by ridiculing the position of men in society, especially powerful men, and replacing men with government. For example, in Canada it’s pretty much impossible to obtain what’s known as an authorization to carry, and this is largely by feminist design. The Liberal Women’s Caucus, that’s Liberal Party of Canada, made gun control into a “women’s issue” in -I believe, 1992, and Jean Chretien was subsequently swept to power with three back-to-back majority governments. Men, and also women, have had the singular tool which can be used to defeat an attack removed, in an attempt to force Canadians to rely on the government for their protection. The protection of the person, the home, and the family has historically been incorporated into the male identity, and feminists have fought tooth and nail to criminalize self-protection in Canada. Firearms here are synonymous with a “woman’s issue,” yet the overwhelming majority of the firearm owning population is male. Feminists have therefore discouraged a traditionally male activity associated with strength, power, intellect etc. Hunting, shooting, and self-defense are extremely difficult to do, and it’s largely thanks to feminism.
Furthermore, by ridiculing firearms owners as “gun-totting toothless rednecks,” feminists have created a negative association with an overtly masculine hobby and sport. Young boys are socialized to see people who engage in shooting as primitive, backwards, and uneducated. When they start to try to date women, they’ve already internalized this message, and are likely to also engage in ridiculing these activities because they mistakenly believe that this is what women want to hear. My own experience is that women generally like men who engage in this “barbaric,” and “primitive” activities, and this goes completely against what feminists say. That is to say that women in general tend to like, appreciate and prefer overtly masculine men, the same men that I see feminists ridicule, mock and deride.
“Can women be powerful, strong, smart or fast? If they are these things, are they capable of being good women?”
Yes, of course women are capable. But, pushing these tropes without showing a man say, who is capable of matching a woman in these areas, necessarily erodes the male gender. And I totally realize that’s blatantly unfair. Sad, but true. Take “How to train your Dragon” a movie I really like, what can I say, I’m a sucker for Toothless… The protagonist, Hiccup is definitely un-masculine, hell, he’s downright effeminate, and contrast with Astrid, who embodies all the girl-power tropes. I watched the movie as an adult of course, but a little boy would internalize the message that he was never going to be able to match Astrid’s, or substitute an alternative love-interest’s, ANY GIRL’s physical prowess, so he shouldn’t bother even trying, and therefore the way to win her affections was through the use of his mind. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, except of course that women tend to like physically attractive men, which usually means establishing some level of physical fitness. A boy who resolves to “be like Hiccup” is setting himself up for future failure. Do you see how that works? And Stoic’s overt masculinity is always portrayed as backward and primitive, next to Hiccup’s clever, and progressive inventions.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with female preference in physically desirable males. I see something wrong with lying to little boys about what women usually want in a man. It’s not that Astrid is a bad woman, but she makes Hiccup into a bad man.
“You know, you don’t need to feel personally attacked by anti-rape campaigns unless you yourself have committed rape. Do you feel personally attacked by anti-crime campaigns? Anti-drug-abuse campaigns?”
I’ve not committed rape, but I still feel squarely targeted by anti-rape campaigns, especially since an accused man has the odds stacked so squarely against him. I always feel like I’m being blamed, like masculinity its self is the problem. I identify strongly with masculinity, with “maleness.” I don’t see anything wrong with being male, but what I feel from society is that there is something wrong with being male. I’ve always felt that I value and appreciate women, and so accusations of misogyny tend to sting pretty badly. I don’t want to be a revolutionary so to speak, but I remember keenly being pressured to become one in high school. We were told, “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem,” and that never sat well with me at all.
Maybe it’s irrational, and I guess I can live with that. But, I don’t see how that should result in feminism being freed from criticism…
Oh, and as a gun-owner, a Canadian one, I get REALLY nervous whenever the police talk about guns. I have every reason to feel targeted in that regard.
AFLAC, is tiring building those huge strawfeminists?
^is it tiring
Though all your pompous blathering the one thing that keeps coming through loud and clear is that these “effeminate” guys you keep mentioning are not, in your estimation, properly qualified to considered men.
To which I say; fuck you pal.
When they start to try to date women, they’ve already internalized this message, and are likely to also engage in ridiculing these activities because they mistakenly believe that this is what women want to hear.
Sure, if they’re hanging around anti-gun sites, which not many teenage boys are. And since you’re so influenced by movies (and apparently think that no one can think for themselves), have you noticed how violent big summer (gotta get that teen money) are? There’s guns and shit blowing up everywhere, FYI. Not exactly an anti-violence stance, if you catch my drift.
Oh, blockquotes.
AFLAC: My gun-owning American friend says you’re a dumbass. Yes, pro-gun-control liberals who own guns themselves do exist.
Blockquote fails strike again? I’m still wondering why WordPress doesn’t have a preview function, or at the very least an edit button. :P
@A Canadian Lossless Audio Format, a few comments in no particular order
Weren’t strong men being reviled by the feminist majority just a page or so ago?
That was horribly phrased, but at least you’re better there than one of old regulars. As a hint, though, women aren’t a monolith, and not all of them are into men.
You see things saying “don’t rape people” and feel that masculinity is being attacked, then. Could that say something about your concept of what is masculine, or about society’s concept of same?
[citation needed]
This probably isn’t a great place for you to be misogynistic then. Try The Spearhead, they’d love you.
Yes, ACLAF, many women like buff men. But! Many other women, different women, like skinny men. Or pudgy men. Or gangly men. Or stocky men. Or roly-poly babyfaced men. And there are also women who are relatively indifferent to what a man looks like, concentrating instead on his intelligence or personality or interests or money or dancing ability or sense of personal style or career achievements…in short, women’s tastes in men are as varied as the women themselves are.
So kindly leave your gender essentialist bullshit at the door, kthxbai.
Tangent: That last is one reason why “That thing you just said is misogynistic” may be a strategically more useful thing to say than “you are a misogynist,” as you can focus on the behaviour and maybe get people to change it.
(Arguments as to why I’m wrong will be read and considered!)
Meant to add: And some women aren’t attracted to men at all.
By that last, I mean the “accusations of misogyny” part.
Adding to ShadetheDruid’s point: do you drive a car? Would you like it if everyone was able to drive a car, regardless of whether they had a license or not? I mean, if there’s some sort of feminist uprising/cull, how would people escape if not by car? I can’t imagine Canadian wilderness is particularly hospitable.
AFLAC, given that you’re a libertarian, I invite you to write and produce your own TV shows that present men the way you wish they were presented, and if you don’t, I’ll kindly suggest that it’s your own damn fault that there’s nothing on TV that you like.
Things I’ve learned from AFLAC today:
AFLAC only ever watched three TV shows.
AFLAC married a woman who liked something about men that he was not.
When feminists campaign for gun control and deconstruct gender roles, they’re actually being anti-man.
What a productive day.
@Tulgey
You forgot “shooting, hunting, and self-defence are hard because of feminism” (almost a direct quote. Evidently everyone knew how to hunt and use weaponry perfectly until sometime around the women’s suffrage movement.
Yeah, that’s the main thing that usually comes up when I talk gun control with him, that you have to go through all these lessons, tests, have insurance and things (most importantly they want to check you know what the fuck you’re doing) to be allowed to drive a car. But to own a gun? Apparently not, which is messed up.
“Sexual harassment laws give women freedom to dress slutty and still have the nerve to complain when men sneak a peek.”
Guys probably look at my boobs alot, because they’re nice :D But 99% of the time I wouldn’t NOTICE, unless the guy was super creepy and obvious about it. If I check out a guy’s ass he wouldn’t know it. Why must they keep misframing this issue as being about ‘sneaking a peek’ rather than leering at or harassing women.
A car is a device which if used for something other than its intended purpose, can severely injure people.
A gun’s intended purpose is to severely injure people (and animals).
Yeah…
I mean, I’m kinda hungry right now. If it weren’t for feminism, I’m sure I, an uncoordinated untrained skinny suburban boy with no outdoors or weapons experience, could grab myself a crossbow and have lunch ready in no time. It’s only all these women having rights and being thought of as people around me stopping me.
Morkais: because sometimes you don’t feel like educating someone on why what they said was a problem. It puts the onus back on the marginalized, which gets old after a while. Not everything has to be strategically useful.
@MorkaisChosen
This was an argument for gun control not being incompatible with owning guns. You’re very right about both things, but I don’t see what you’re trying to get across.
I’d argue that most car-related injuries are caused by cars being used for their intended purpose, too, just poorly or in unsafe conditions or with some stroke of bad luck happening.
“Hardcore male gamers can sneer at these games and say they’re “fake” all they want, but the fact remains that these games are making just as much money as their precious Bayonetta, probably more.”
It’s funny, Bayonetta is one of my favourite games, and I’ve often had it dismissed by other people as girly and not a real game…female main character, pretty settings, butterflies everywhere. In spite of this it is a really really challenging game even for the ‘hardcore’ on the more difficult settings. At the same time if anyone criticises Bayonetta for her ridiculous sexualisation they rush to defend her.
hellkell: Yep, good point. Think I had that at the back of my mind (hence ‘strategically useful,’ rather than Is Better- sometimes you just want to go “no fuck off”.)
lowquacks: My point is… I don’t actually know. Pretty sure I was basically agreeing with you, and attempting to emphasise that it’s ridiculous that the more purely dangerous thing (the thing that has no non-injuring purpose) has less regulation on it.
Sometimes, a gun’s intended purpose is to murder watermelons.
“Furthermore, by ridiculing firearms owners as “gun-totting toothless rednecks,” feminists have created a negative association with an overtly masculine hobby and sport. Young boys are socialized to see people who engage in shooting as primitive, backwards, and uneducated. When they start to try to date women, they’ve already internalized this message, and are likely to also engage in ridiculing these activities because they mistakenly believe that this is what women want to hear.”
I’m a long-time lurker, first-time commenter,
and WHAT?
dude, I’m Canadian. earning my hunting license was PART of my high school curriculum. granted I went to a small school in rural BC. but still. we were taught firearm safety and hunting skills IN SCHOOL. it is not hard to get to be able to hunt, it’s just a process to actually get a firearm, and then to follow hunting laws. most of my friends’ dads hunt, and also wish it was legal to shoot all the bears that eat from their fruit trees in the summer. I’ve lived in BC, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, and *I* have always been an outlier for not being attracted to men who own/use firearms. I’ve been dumped for not wanting to go gopher hunting. so maybe you’re just living in the wrong part of Canada, or maybe you’re just full of shit.
I find the whole “casual games = crap” thing stupid anyway, and another reason I avoid getting involved in the gaming community. If a game isn’t your thing or doesn’t have the difficulty level compatible to your skill, fine, but it’s still a game. I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t say something like Tetris or Pacman aren’t “real games”, but those are hardly any more “hardcore” than today’s “casual games”.
Then again, I kind of hate the term “casual game” anyway. In my mind, there’s no “casual games”, just “casual gamers”. People who don’t have the time to do a lot of gaming, or don’t want to, are casual gamers regardless of what they play. Conversely, if you’re playing Tetris for 8 hours a day, i’d say you’re pretty hardcore. :P
*comparable …. -_-
“It always cracks me up when MRA shows the Simpson as a prime example of misandry. Sure, Homer is not very bright, but does anyone really think that Marge is a feminist role model? Lol. All the Simpsons are deeply flawed characters, although they all have (Homer included) their shining moments.”
Yes, and Homer is the most loved character on the show. He has faults, huge ones, but he gets all the best lines and no one would watch the Simpsons without him. When I ask people who their favourite character is, I always have to preface it with “apart from Homer”.
Wait, I saw “How To Train Your Dragon.” Hiccup is the main character; Astrid is a secondary character set up as his love interest. Hiccup is the one who learns that dragons can be tamed and ridden; he shows Astrid that her way is wrong and teaches her how to do things his way. Ultimately Astrid becomes one of several dragonriders, all the rest of whom are male, with Hiccup as their leader. And Hiccup saves the day.
Hiccup is the hero of the story and succeeds in every possible sense. Astrid is strong and brave, but ultimately second best to Hiccup and in need of his instruction.
How weak would Astrid have to be before you would feel comfortable with the movie? Would it be okay for her to be a warrior as long as it was made clear that she wasn’t very good at it and all the boys could beat her? Or would it be better if she wasn’t a warrior at all?
Why does a woman have to be weak for a man to be strong?
… that should have read “most of my friends’ parents hunt”. where I’m from it’s more “families who go on hunting trips” and “families who do not”.
Wait, are you seriously arguing that it’s impossible for a man to get dates if he doesn’t have giant muscles? Do you live inside a Charles Atlas ad? Because that would be awesome.
I start comments with “wait” a lot.
It’s okay, my Shaenon-patience is endless.
>>>The Liberal Women’s Caucus, that’s Liberal Party of Canada
Hah. What choice words do you have for the NDP, one wonders?
Harper’s Conservatives. When even Paul Martin and Jean Chretien aren’t doing enough to sell all of Canada to the highest bidder.
HE’S NOT A BEEFCAKE AS WELL THOUGH.
DO YOU SEE NOW HOW OUR MISANDRIST CULTURE DEGRADES MEN?
Here’s a little-known Canadian fact: instead of men, our government is primarily made up of caribou! What a fascinating country.
By the way, I know fucking tons of Canadians with guns (some registered, many unfortunately not).
Shaenon: Actually Ruffnut (one of the twins) is female. In some ways she’s the role that makes the movie more female-positive, even though she has a much smaller part, because she isn’t a love interest and doesn’t “read” as female (not graceful, not pretty, not well-behaved, etc).
Guns are “associated with strength, power, intellect etc.”? I was not aware of this. Power, I can kind of see — guns can give a person power in some situations. But how exactly do guns make a person stronger or smarter?
Fun facts: My aunt used to hunt deer (for eating, not for sport) with a crossbow. My father was an avid hunter of pheasants. (Also for eating, though to be honest they’re not that tasty.) I grew up with a rifle in the house, and learned basic rifle/gun safety. I am a feminist.
@Viscaria Male caribou, or female caribou? It matters.
My associations with intellect are your standard shy glasses-wearing academic, a character template who, presented with a gun, goes “argh this is dangerous, I wish not to touch it.”
Funny, Morkais, my father gives shooting lessons to some of those academics, and some of their grown kids. He’s learned to do some neat stuff, and they learned to shoot.
Well this thread has gone well hasn’t it? >.<
"Well done, and THANK you for reinforcing all of my biases…"
If you've really been lurking, then you know my favorite kind of troll is the kind that just needs a dictionary, so here's your dictionary —
bi·as, noun, adjective, adverb, verb, bi·ased, bi·as·ing or ( especially British ) bi·assed, bi·as·sing.
noun
1. an oblique or diagonal line of direction, especially across a woven fabric.
2. a particular tendency or inclination, especially one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.
3. Statistics . a systematic as opposed to a random distortion of a statistic as a result of sampling procedure.
4. Lawn Bowling .
a. a slight bulge or greater weight on one side of the ball or bowl.
b. the curved course made by such a ball when rolled.
5. Electronics . the application of a steady voltage or current to an active device, as a diode or transistor, to produce a desired mode of operation.
6. a high-frequency alternating current applied to the recording head of a tape recorder during recording in order to reduce distortion.
adjective
7. cut, set, folded, etc., diagonally: This material requires a bias cut.
You're looking for #2 here, and that word you're using, I do not think it means what you think it means.
"Firearms here are synonymous with a “woman’s issue,” yet the overwhelming majority of the firearm owning population is male."
Well this is ironic, my statistic digging got distracted by a call for the local statute for carrying a gun into a casino (I have google-fu). Now, back to using my google-fu on Canadian statistics!
Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile (Direct PDF link)
Page 48 — “There were 4,490 solved homicides between 1994 and 2003, of which 1,695 (38%) were family-related.50 Of these family-related homicides almost half were spousal homicides (47%) while one-quarter were homicides of children and youth (Table 3.1). Overall, six out of ten family-related homicides involved female victims (60%). In contrast, among cases of non-family homicides, the majority of victims were male (79%).”
Page 49 — “Between 1994 and 2003, spouses in a common-law relationship accounted for a larger proportion of spousal homicide victims than married, separated, and divorced persons. Forty percent of all spousal homicides involved common-law persons, followed by married persons (35%), while just under one-quarter of all spousal homicides involved separated persons (23%) and the remaining 2% were divorced persons.52
…
More than half of all spousal homicides against men were committed by female common-law partners (54%), while 35% of spousal homicides against women were committed by a male common-law partner. On the other hand, a larger proportion of female victims were killed by a separated spouse compared to male victims (26% compared to 11%).54
…
The methods used to kill spouses differed for male and female victims. For example, between 1994 and 2003, twothirds of males killed by a spouse were killed by stabbing (66%), followed by shooting (18%). In contrast, the most common method used to kill female spouses was shooting (31%), followed by stabbing (29%), strangulation (20%) and physical force (16%) (Table 3.4).”
Page 52 — “Historical data consistently show that parents are responsible for the vast majority of family-related homicides against young people. Since 1994, 90% of all familial killings committed against victims aged 0-to-17 years were committed by a parent.
As indicated in Chapter 4 Family Homicide-Suicides, fathers72 are more likely than mothers73 to kill their own children. Between 1994 and 2003, fathers committed 58% of the family-related homicides of children and youth. Mothers committed about one-third (32%) and other family members were responsible for the remaining 9%. This pattern is fairly consistent across all age categories of victims, although the difference is less exaggerated when the victim is an infant (Figure 3.3). It is unusual for another family member (such as a sibling or an extended family member) to kill a child; however, the proportion of such killings increases substantially during a person’s adolescent years.”
Page 53 — “The methods used by family members to kill young victims tend to differ depending on the age of the victim.78 Younger victims (0-to-6 years) are most often killed as a result of physical force, perhaps due to their greater physical vulnerability. Between 1994 and 2003, 27% of children aged 1-to-6 years were strangled or suffocated while another 25% were beaten to death (Table 3.5). Infants under one year of age are most often killed by shaking. Since 1997,79 27 infants (or 36%) have been killed as a result of Shaken Baby Syndrome.
Older children and youth (7-to-17 years) are more often killed with a weapon, most commonly a knife or a firearm. Between 1994 and 2003, a family member used a firearm to kill 38% of all family homicide victims aged 7-to-17 years. Another 19% of victims were stabbed to death by a family member.”
So um, yeah, gun control is related to domestic violence which is really everyone’s issue, not a woman’s issue, but since the “manly man” type act like you are about it…
hellkell: I never said the stereotypes that spring to mind for me are accurate… ;-)
ShadetheDruid — my tetris high score on here is 757 lines, I doubt I’ll ever top it, so I’d really love to see these “that’s not a real game” gamers try.
Also, those “manly” FPS’s like Halo? I was once on the receiving end of — “Who is wearing pink and why do they keep sniping me?!” — being a FAAB genderqueer and freshman, playing with seniors, I just raised my hand and waited to see if the second question still needed an answer — it did not, he walked back to his dorm doing the human equiv. of tail-between-legs.
But yeah, reducing the breast size to reasonable would totally kill gaming.
jesus, manboobz is so lame.
Actually on topic —
“They take fluff majors but don’t realize anyone with less than half a brain could pass classes in the humanities and social sciences.”
…those are curved too guys, meaning you get a C or worse if you aren’t in the top half — or do they think curving grades makes everyone’s grade better than it really is?
ACLAF: I’ve always WANTED to be masculin, manly, powerful, strong, smart, fast etc. Thanks to feminism, I turned against that impulse, and stayed that way, thinking quite naively that I’d be okay. That was a colossal mistake, and has cost me maybe five years of life that I can never get back.
You poor dear. I’m all those things, and a feminist. Feminism has made me better at them.
I think the problem isn’t actually feminism. It’s you.
And I guess what bugs me, what gets to me, is that you don’t seem to want to understand this David. For a guy who spends all his time ragging on the MRM, you don’t seem to know what it’s like to feel hated, and reviled every time you turn on the television, for your whole life. And worse, it seems like you don’t care, or worse, you don’t WANT to care.
You’re right, I don’t care, because it hasn’t happened to me.
Howard: I can’t speak to the soldiers and policemen. I’m not one of them, and have no firsthand knowledge there.
I do have knowledge of female soldiers. They are just as good as male soldiers. If I had to build an infantry platoon, I can’t imagine doing it without some of the female soldiers I’ve known.
I’m not sure if anyone has pointed this out to ACLAF, but feminists didn’t just lobby extra hard for gun control because they are mean, mean, man-hating bitches.
They lobbied extra hard for gun control because of the Ecole Polytechnique massacre.
Oh and FUCK YOU that’s an issue that concerns women.
While I don’t buy and use guns, I am in favor of gun rights. I am in favor of Missouri’s conceal carry laws. My dad and brother both have several rifles and pistols. My husband’s grandma used to have a mounted shotgun above her front door for shooting rabbits (rabbit meat is tasty). I used to shoot Mt. Dew cans as a teenager. So anyway, ACLAF, you shouldn’t generalize about feminists being all for gun control.
Am I the only one who thinks of the AFLAC duck when I read his name?
Furthermore, by ridiculing firearms owners as “gun-totting toothless rednecks,”
This is Canada, where if one is a legal owner of firerarms, ammunition can be mailed to one’s home.
Yes, pistol permits are harder to get, but a rifle permit is pretty much pro-forma.
As evidenced by the fact that our failed flounce is complaining not that he can’t own guns, but that he can’t pack heat in the streets.
I’ve been to Canada. I’ve been in the “seedy” parts of Ontario and Toronto. Let’s just say that I wasn’t nervous.
Bear in mind, Canada allows anyone to carry a knife that goes from elbow to fingertip.
But this moron is worried that he can’t protect himself.
Shade: Blockquote fails strike again? I’m still wondering why WordPress doesn’t have a preview function, or at the very least an edit button.
Do you really want the MRAs who post here to be able to go back and edit?
I don’t.
Ruby: The video game industry would be just fine without damsels in distress and female characters with obnoxiously large breasts. And good for Anita for raising $130,000. More power to her.
And prison would be better if there was less rape.
But you need to get your jollies, so it’s ok if that doesn’t get any better.
I also understand arguments in favor of gun control, too. It’s true that abusers use guns to kill their exes, and they should not have access to them. That’s why in the US, abusers lose their carry permits under the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban. I’m not like one of the NRA radicals that want dangerous people to have access to any and all type of weapons.
Yeah limiting the gaslighting attempts is good, but WP does have preview option (or WP2 did, I still have to poke WP3)
Nope, that’s why I’ve written it that way. It’s not like he’s here in good faith.
Ironic, because I’d fail Young Guy’s rant in any freshman comp class I’ve ever taught. And I ought to point out that I’ve only ever taught remedial freshman comp – one kid actually stormed out on me because he didn’t know what the words “noun” and “verb” meant and thought I was making fun of him. (Once we cleared that up, he made astonishing progress and is now a nuclear medicine tech, IIRC.)
@Dani
Yeah… no. I’ve seen quite a bit of really awful writing and analysis, and I go to a prestigious liberal arts college and am not even the professors. Writing coherently is hard, and being able to critically analyze history, anthropology, etc. is hard, too. Yeah, it doesn’t involve as much studying as the hard and natural sciences (though I did study pretty hard for my last sociology test) but what it requires is harder to pull out at the last minute.
Actually, the lowest grade I’ve pulled in a college class so far has been in a 100 level English course (on poetry) and I’ve taken calculus-based physics, cell biology, organic chemistry, and several 300-level math classes. In the humanities and social sciences, it may be harder to outright flunk (though still possible) but it is also harder to get stellar grades.
And seriously, while most people won’t study literature for a job, being able to critically analyze writing and to write clearly and accurately will help whatever you end up doing, and I’m sure all the other profs would prefer if the English profs and high-school English teachers taught that so they didn’t.
(True story: my developmental prof and I had to explain active vs passive voice to one of my classmates. She had mixed it up with present tense, but picked the correct definition up pretty quickly. I can’t help but feel like someone along the line assumed she knew what active voice was and didn’t bother to check.)