>
 |
| Cats: Not hardcore gamers. |
On MGTOWforums.com, the central questions about women and gaming aren’t “what do women want, game-wise” or “is there something about certain types of games that repels women, or do they stay away because it gets really tiresome really quickly to have to listen to 14-year-old boys calling them “cunts” on XboxLive?” No, to the MGTOWers the big question is simpler: Why are women allowed to play video games at all?
Why can’t men have their own space? …
Women, back the fuck off. You stole our TV. You stole our movies. You stole our malls. You stole our clothe shops. You stole our supermarkets Meanwhile the gays are stealing our gyms, our theater, our dance, our music. Video-games is all we have left.
I don’t hear this bitch [note: a commenter on CNET] complaining about the lack of inclusiveness of games like bejeweled to men (I’ve played bejeweled maybe 10 minutes in my life, fun for about that length of time or when you are sitting on the bus). …
Companies like Zynga want to make casual games to target the hundreds of millions of girls on facebook. Fine! … Why not push to make casual games more “male-friendly”, you bitch? Farm-ville and City-ville could use some thought. Those games suck. They are clearly designed for the modern day brainless airhead bimbo with too much time on her hands.
The only casual game I’ve ever sucked dry was Plants Vs. Zombies. And if you aim to finish everything it becomes really hardcore in the survival levels.
1) Women identify with their gender too much. It seems that taking control of a male avatar is a problem for most of them. They cannot identify. I can identify with almost all avatars today. Male, female, adult, child, alien etc…
2) Females have less interesting personalities in real life, and therefore in fiction. There is a reason fiction involves men going through challenges and being transformed by them. In video games the two female archetypes are: the princess and the “you go grrl”. Women in real life have less dimension. They aren’t interesting. They bitch or they submit. That’s it. And I don’t care to hear some loud mouthed bitch barking orders at me through an ear piece. It’s unpleasant. If I’m in a war simulator I like hearing men talk. They usually have unique personalities, accents, character traits etc… When female characters do this they come off as pretending to be men and it doesn’t work.
Bitches like the one above form groups funded by donations to artificially fuck with the market. Men’s money today goes overwhelmingly towards good video-games. Let the market decide what women get. Bitch!
>I think David does not have to mine very hard to find examples of misogynistic behavior of men on that site.Example B Example CAnd those were just from the current front page I was looking at.
>BarKeep posting and hopefully you'll get some of that much needed attention. I understand that you are working really hard at being fringe hard-core, hope it pays off for you!
>They bitch or they submit.Fortunately all it takes to make them stop bitching and start submitting is a gentle slap on the ass. I learn all my life lessons from Duke Nukem.
>sure Kave ill keep trying to be "fringe hard core" whatever that stupidity was meant to imply.as for manboobz…keep tracking down the "misogyny" you gin up out of thin air. the mens movement is growing day by day, the word feminist is now a dirty word, and even women themselves are shying away from the moniker.the village idiot futrelle will surely attribute this fact to misogyny, as will the rest of you brainless parakeet mimes. But it is in fact misandry that is fueling the rapid growth and proliferation of the MRM.the very "misogyny" that fuels and sustains this unoriginal cookie cutter repository, is Dependant on the fact that we (MRA's) are unrestrained by the forces of political correctness unlike futrelle here. does this mean manboobz will be able to scour MRA blogs and find his little dollops of misogyny, sure. we however do not cower at the censorship that dictates to manboobz exactly what he can and cant say, (yes we saw how you folded like a bitch at the mere accusation of ableism)the last thing futrelle wants is to be painted with the same brush as the MRA's whos legitimate grievances he so vehemently deflects and avoids with his umm "humor"feministe to manboobz:stay in your place little boy, we set the parameters heremanboobz: my apologies i was only paraphrasing, please allow me to save face…lets talk about meesogynee on the spearhead.lol.. quite interesting to watch futrelle cowtow
>People took issue with what he said, and he apologized for it. That's what peeople who aren't assholes do. Or would it have been more appropriately manly of him to tell those who criticized his word choice to fuck off?The reason you're characterizing the discussion the way you are is because, like pretty much all misogynists, you view every human interaction as a power struggle. Those of us who are less childish than that can respect somebody while still criticizing his or her flaws, and the person criticized can acknowledge those flaws. Trying to act all alpha-wolf about it and sticking stubbornly to what he said the first time would just be puerile.
>Oh, please, Bar. Just. Please. "Folded like a bitch"? Do you understand that this reaction is why everyone else thinks MRA members are misandrists *and* misogynists? The members at Feministe were calling out the members of their own feminist community on the offensive, ableist language many of them were using. David acknowledged that one (paraphrased) comment he used was unacceptable. Other posters who had used words like "r#tarded" uncritically apologized for these comments, too. That's what adults do. When you say that this behavior is something that only women or "manginas" do, you're saying something very bad about what you think of men.
>Folks like Bar think being callous and unapologetic makes them more manly or some crap. In their eyes, to be strong you must make light of the suffering of others, not empathize with them. Compassion is weakness, as is anything they identify as being "feminine". They embrace their own inner weakness and identify it as strength. Pretty pathetic really.
>Cold-I am fairly sure that the reason they fought to get it banned had to do with the fact that it lets the player rape a little girl, her sister and mother repeatedly, force them to get abortions and otherwise do incredibly disgusting violations.I know what the game is about; I'm acquainted with some of the people behind the cracked, poorly translated English release. It's a phenomenally stupid game but it's still just a game and is unable to hurt anyone. Most men deal with media they don't like by simply not buying it, but obviously that's not good enough for feminists.While the idiotic campaign got the game banned in Japan(the only country where it was ever legally available for sale) it also caused that cracked and badly translated torrent to go from less than 100 seeds to several thousand seeds for several months as tens of thousands of people downloaded and played the game. Membership on the forum run by the release team exploded, and previously apolitical members became MRAs almost overnight. A Pyrrhic victory if there ever was one.
>You know. most people would say that 2 examples in two years would count as scarcely any.Well in that case there are scarcely any nuclear disasters. At any rate, it's two more examples than have been provided of men demanding that a game be banned or censored.Also, the Duke Nukem capture-the-babe-and-slap-her deal is pretty bad. I suspect that putting that in there was partly a publicity stunt on the part of the game makers. Offend women and sell games! Wonderful.Those of us who have actually played previous Duke Nukem games know that this is part and parcel with the franchise. I don't demand that things which offend me be banned or censored or not stocked at major retailers, and it's not a tall order for others to do the same.
>@cold, the link you give is a signature list asking walmart not to sell certain games, not a petition to change the law.If you actually read the link you would have seen this:If Mr. Pritchford thinks violence against women will boost his bottom line, let's show him otherwise. Walmart is set to be one of the primary sellers of the Duke Nukem game when it is released on June 14th. Tell this family friendly retailer to refuse to sell the Duke Nukem Forever game until the "babe-slapping mode" is removed.Notice that the end goal is to get the game censored through the application of financial pressure.
>Not that any of the above gets you off the hook for making monumentally disingenuous statements like this.A random sampling of male and female-run blogs will make it pretty clear which gender is more likely to tolerate and rebut dissenting opinions and which one is more likely to delete and ban.
>At any rate, it's two more examples than have been provided of men demanding that a game be banned or censored.Well, no it's not. I already mentioned Jack Thompson, who waged an intense war on any video game that violated his sensibilities, demanding that they be banned. He continues to wage those wars even though he's been disbarred and nobody pays attention to him anymore. And he's not, by any appearances, a woman or a feminist.I think calls for censorship are misguided, but the only time you're likely to notice them is when people organize around a certain issue. And feminists tend to organize around gender a lot more than men. MRAs are too busy circlejerking to accomplish anything, even a simple online petition.More to the point, because we live in a patriarchy, men are less likely to encounter media that offends them than women are. Most media is geared toward men, after all.But when men are offended by something, they're about as likely as women to try to censor it. Like I said, calls for censorship that actually gain public notice tend to come from organizations. Look for religious organizations full of men wanting to ban pornography, and you know what you'll find? That they exist.
>I remember posting a video once where I complained about token females in games and tv shows. As a little kid I liked a lot of the same things my brother liked, but hated how there was always the token boring female character (April, Arcee, whomever) that I was "supposed to" identify with. Same with video games. Until they figured out that guys like tits in their games and put in a million chicks, it was the Valkyrie or Chun Li or Sonya … the ONE girl in the game. And in cases like the Valkyrie, she was a pretty shitty character (I ended up switching to the Elf after a while, when I realized even with my 6 or 7-year-old brain that the Valkyrie … really sucked).So I was complaining about how I hated being forced to identify with this ONE female character, and how that can still be a problem today. One female or no females at all. Enter the Clueless Guy.Clueless Guy thinks he's agreeing with me. "Yeah!" he says sincerely. "It's so sexist of them! I mean, how dare they assume women can't relate to a male character!"Wtf. I think by now we've all heard the Chicken Little story, about how the character would have been a girl but little boys won't relate to a girl. And so every time one of these darn animation companies puts out a film, the main character is always a boy. Boy boy boy boy boy. With the token female love interest, usually. Because they think a boy won't relate to or be interested in a female character, and yet women and girls are expected to relate to and be interested in male characters. It's stupid. Miyazaki hasn't made bajillions of dollars off of little boy heroes, and Ryu is way overshadowed by Chun Li in popularity, at least the way I see it. (Granted it's because they want to screw her, but my point is that a girl character can be popular among guys.) Your cocks won't fall off if there are a handful of competent female characters who aren't sex kittens or stereotypes. God forbid I get to play someone who has the same genitals as I do and who doesn't suck as a character. God forbid you give a little girl a role model in a game so she will be compelled to play something other than Barbie Goes Shopping or Nitzy's Pet Parade.
>The free market will keep games manly? Good luck with that. Last I checked, the free market had noticed that some ungodly percentage of WoW players never played into the levels that required things like joining guilds, specifically because of all the manly man trash talk like the kind you see on Fat Ugly or Slutty.* The free market is sad because that's just so many people who aren't getting really hooked on the game. *Is it just me, or are the submissions that get posted on FUS kind of mild? I'm sure there are whole new levels of crazy they don't post for whatever reason, although I think they have an explicit "no penis shot" policy.
>Cold, once the game is taken off the shelf and the publicity dies down, no one will be playing the game. And what kind of person thinks it is his right to play a game that lets him rape a little kid to the point of adding it to the list of things to be an activist on for the men's movement? How will that type of activism help with a man's chance to get access to his children when he tries to organize something that will allow him to play a game that lets him rape a little girl? Or is associated with such a movement? You think a judge will ignore the fact the father is demanding the right to play that kind of game or do you think the judge will be inclined to order supervised visits or sever parental rights completely? That game is not a GTA game that had some disturbing things in it but was clearly about adults…it is a game that lets you rape a little girl. Not a game where you rape an adult woman, which would be bad enough but a child. And to become a MRA because women (and not a few men/fathers) wanted to ban it? That means you do not have the sense to see why playing a game where you rape a kid is bad.
>Well, no it's not. I already mentioned Jack Thompson, who waged an intense war on any video game that violated his sensibilities, demanding that they be banned.Jack Thompson is a man(singular), not men(plural). You can always find nutty individuals doing nutty things, but when a large group of people start doing something it is a much greater cause for concern. I have provided two examples in which a significant number of women worked, as a group, to censor or ban a game, and so far zero examples of men doing this have been presented.Look for religious organizations full of men wanting to ban pornography, and you know what you'll find? That they exist.In my experience those organizations are at least 50% female. The vast, vast majority of censorship I have encountered in my life was done by, or at the urging of, women.
>Cold, once the game is taken off the shelf and the publicity dies down, no one will be playing the game.Oh, so the retro gaming community is just a figment of my imagination? DOSBox is used exclusively for running ancient productivity software? Out-of-print games on Ebay never get any bids?Seriously, can't you do ANY research before you make a claim like that? Incidentally there's an old Japanese rape game from the early 90s called Isaku which continues to be a healthy torrent and has developed quite a cult following. The object of the game is to save girls from being raped by the school janitor but most players deliberately let it happen so they can watch the rape scenes.And what kind of person thinks it is his right to play a game that lets him rape a little kid to the point of adding it to the list of things to be an activist on for the men's movement?Someone who actually read their country's constitution? Btw, I love how you gendered that question, as if not a single female played that game. I know for a fact that several women did play it and at least one woman(bunnygirl) helped with the English release. The voices of the women were done by female voice actors.How will that type of activism help with a man's chance to get access to his children when he tries to organize something that will allow him to play a game that lets him rape a little girl? Or is associated with such a movement?People who are not feminists or manginas tend to have this thing called "intelligence". Using that intelligence, they carefully consider whether they should post on a particular board under their real name, or whether they should use an alias. All the members of that particular board are smart enough to post under an alias and are therefore not affected in their real lives.The ones who became MRAs did so after the banning campaign opened their eyes to the problem of femifascism. Many people don't start to care about political issues until they are directly affected by them, and feminist censorship is no exception.You think a judge will ignore the fact the father is demanding the right to play that kind of game or do you think the judge will be inclined to order supervised visits or sever parental rights completely?Any judge who would be prejudiced by someone being in favor of freedom of expression ought to be permanently removed.That game is not a GTA game that had some disturbing things in it but was clearly about adults…it is a game that lets you rape a little girl. Not a game where you rape an adult woman, which would be bad enough but a child.So what? Committing virtual auto theft and virtual murder is just fine but a special line has to be drawn at rape? Isn't murder a more serious crime than rape, even rape of an underage victim? You DO realize that it's just pixels, right? That there are no real women getting raped in the game and that nobody was hurt in the production of the game?And to become a MRA because women (and not a few men/fathers) wanted to ban it? That means you do not have the sense to see why playing a game where you rape a kid is bad.You clearly don't have the sense to see that just because YOU think something is bad doesn't make it objectively so. I think playing such a game is incredibly stupid but I don't have the arrogance to think that my personal preferences are some kind of objective measure.The members who turned into MRAs included ones who, like me, considered the game to be incredibly stupid. For them it wasn't the game that was in question; it was for the freedom of expression.
>Wow, Cold, I love Phoenix Wright too! Who do you cosplay as? There are lots of female characters but my favourite is Klavier Gavin obviously :DI'm not sure about Rapelay. As Cold points out, only animation is involved. I'd just steer clear of someone, male or female, who chooses entertainment where you, the protaganist, rape a little girl. Same as I avoid people who read the Daily Mail. Anyway, if this guy wants the free market to do it's stuff then he'll have to accept people trying to make games for, er, half of the population. Sorry bud, that's capitalism.
>Here's a link to some MRAs complaining about anti-male violence in a computer game. As I understand it, the game allows you to shoot street harassers, so doesn't count as anti-male unless you think "male" and "harasser" are synonymous, a view shared by imaginary feminazis and real MRAs. Still, it shows that men can and do get upset about fictional violence.http://antimisandry.com/feminist-misandry/hey-baby-latest-misandrist-computer-game-31040.html
>I know what the game is about; I'm acquainted with some of the people behind the cracked, poorly translated English release. It's a phenomenally stupid game but it's still just a game and is unable to hurt anyone.Let's see: a rape simulation game is unable to hurt anyone? You are upset that people might have complaints about it and want it removed from sale? This is somehow a demonstration that feminism has gone beyond The Pale?More revealingly, people on this rape game's forum (including yourself, it seems) have become MRAs as a consequence of the backlash against it?Do I have that right?So as I understand it your defence of this piece of child pornography is a defence of freedom of expression. And that somehow this is a backlash against 'femi-fascism' (rather than, say, common decency).Speaking as a parent and as a games developer, I think you have your priorities wrong, Cold. You may wish to reconsider your position.
>You DO realize that it's just pixels, right? That there are no real women getting raped in the game and that nobody was hurt in the production of the game?You may wish to study those parts of the US and UK laws on child pornography that take a dim view of all forms of child porn, and not just those that involve actual children. You and your like-minded MRA chums might want to agitate to overturn that legislation before you take a stance on those who complain about the game.I'd be interested to see how much public (and male) support you get for that.
>Percy, I'm not sure how common this is for MRAs in general, but I know a few MRAs who do. The antifeminist, on our host's "boob roll" wants to end all anti-pornography laws, including those against child porn. In his view, child pornography (at least the virtual/drawn sort) is something that will keep the freaks and sickos occupied in their basements and keep them from harming any real children.It's a reasonable argument, I think–as unpalatable as virtual rape games like Rapelay may be, if they can prevent actual women and children from being raped (since the losers who play them will be too busy sitting in front of their computer screen to do any actual harm), I don't see any reason they should be B&. The question is, though, whether or they actually do…
>Sorry, just can't let Cold's claim that men don't try to get video games "banned/censored/restricted" slide. Here are some groups which have enacted — not just advocated, enacted — bans or restrictions on violent videogames in the last decade:The government of the state of California.The Army and Airforce Exchange Service.Somalian Islamic extremists.The British Board of Film Classification.The Venezuelan national parliament.None of these bodies are female-dominated, none of them were responding specifically to misogynist games, and none of them were acting on the basis of feminist pressure.And each of them actually imposed a ban through government mechanisms, rather than exerting market pressure to influence companies' decision-making.
>thevagrantsvoice, the argument you're presenting seems to come from the idea that men (or at least, certain men) are programmed to rape, that they will rape whether we like it or not, so the only thing we can do about it is give them virtual people to rape rather than real ones.I don't believe that at all. And the arguments saying that playing video games depicting these certain acts of violence will prevent people from being violent in real life, it's almost like saying that watching anime or reading manga will keep you from writing fanfiction about the series you watch or read. Sure, during that time you are watching or reading, you're not writing fanfiction, but if you want to write fanfiction about it, you'll write fanfiction about it.
>Cold-You are totally not getting what censorship is and isn't. A game comes out. The Government bans it and makes it illegal to sell the game. This is censorship. Note: not all censorship is unconstitutional. The First Amendment call for free speech has limits. Examples of censorship include the Pentagon Papers case. Government gets an injunction saying that newspapers can't release info from the leaked Pentagon Papers because of national security. Now, compare it to your example. A game comes out. Individuals join together to utilize their free speech rights to get other people to not sell the game. They say they'll boycott stores that sell the game. They say they will not be friends with people who buy it. Whatever. The point is that it is private people behind it, not the government. This is not censorship. THIS IS NOT CENSORSHIP.It is actually the point of having free speech. In our country we keep the government from getting involved in these things not because we think that people have a right to go around talking shit. It's because we believe that in the marketplace of ideas the best ideas will win out as the bad ones are shouted down. This is actually the point. Read The Federalist 10 for an example of how this is supposed to work.Censoship: Government is behind the banning. Not Censorship: Individuals are behind it.People getting together and starting petitions and boycotts are democracy and free speech in action.