[QUOTE=thisispain;39941178]yeah you are mr. I WAS PART OF AN LGBT GROUP IN HIGH SCHOOL, FOR 2 YEARS lmao
you dont even take the time to read my name properly, so i dont even believe that you read anyones post including mine
feminism was incredibly important in breaking down sexual repression which led to the sexual revolution in the early 60's because, and this is historical, the most important thing in a free society (and the only way to lift a country out of poverty if i might add) is to give women the right to their own reproduction and this happened with the birth control pill which combined with the philosophy of the "new free woman" of second-wave feminism lifted the veil completely on all issues of sexuality in western culture, and that was absolutely crucial for the existence of LGBT discourse which went hand in hand as many famous feminists in the 70s were also successful in campaigning for lgbt rights, see gloria steinem
[editline]16th March 2013[/editline]
those are all your words[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to make an argument since I don't really have an opinion on the issue of tropes against women and all, and instead I have a question.
Is there anything when it comes to sexual freedom directly addressing infidelity? Not polygamy or polyamory, though.
I just want to know.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941334]Is there anything when it comes to sexual freedom directly addressing infidelity? Not polygamy or polyamory, though.
I just want to know.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean? Cheating is a shitty thing to do, though it should always be a completely legal thing to do, you should always have the right to do whatever you want with your body.
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39941410]What do you mean? Cheating is a shitty thing to do, though it should always be a completely legal thing to do, you should always have the right to do whatever you want with your body.[/QUOTE]
But if a guy cheats on his wife she can destroy all his things, divorce him, take half of what he has left, plus alimoney and custody rights, and he totally deserves it, right?
[QUOTE=soulharvester;39941434]But if a guy cheats on his wife she can destroy all his things, divorce him, take half of what he has left, plus alimoney and custody rights, and he totally deserves it, right?[/QUOTE]
Man, you should take a reading comprehension class, I didn't say anything like that.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;39941434]But if a guy cheats on his wife she can destroy all his things, divorce him, take half of what he has left, plus alimoney and custody rights, and he totally deserves it, right?[/QUOTE]
What the fuck are you talking about?
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39941410]What do you mean? Cheating is a shitty thing to do, though it should always be a completely legal thing to do, you should always have the right to do whatever you want with your body.[/QUOTE]
There's always considering how much emotional damage it can do to someone. It needs to be discouraged in any society, but I guess you can do that without making it illegal.
I personally think it should be considered emotional abuse, but anyway, I just wanted to know if sexual freedoms didn't openly condone things like infidelity.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941482]There's always considering how much emotional damage it can do to someone. It needs to be discouraged in any society, but I guess you can do that without making it illegal.
I personally think it should be considered emotional abuse, but anyway, I just wanted to know if sexual freedoms didn't openly condone things like infidelity.[/QUOTE]
Isn't it already though? Pretty much everyone agrees that cheating is one of the shittiest things you can do to a person.
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;39941495]Isn't it already though? Pretty much everyone agrees that cheating is one of the shittiest things you can do to a person.[/QUOTE]
I dunno if it's one of the shittiest possible but I mean it's a pretty big dick move.
[QUOTE=Winters;39941498]I dunno if it's one of the shittiest possible but I mean it's a pretty big dick move.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but I mean it in the sense that it's already seen as a bad thing and most people will sympathize with you if you've been cheated on.
[QUOTE=Winters;39941498]I dunno if it's one of the shittiest possible but I mean it's a pretty big dick move.[/QUOTE]
Being cheated on usually means your ability to trust people in relationships is shattered, and you're usually left feeling anguished, alienated, and addicted to finding every single painful detail about what happened behind your back, no matter how much they curdle your stomach.
It's up there on the list.
Anyway, I'm glad the shit spewing (or rather, people insulting each other) has cooled down.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941482]There's always considering how much emotional damage it can do to someone. It needs to be discouraged in any society, but I guess you can do that without making it illegal.
I personally think it should be considered emotional abuse, but anyway, I just wanted to know if sexual freedoms didn't openly condone things like infidelity.[/QUOTE]
Cheating is pretty widely discouraged all around the globe, its pretty much been discouraged all throughout history, not to say it never happened a shitload back in the day and even today, but its still discouraged.
It wont ever be illegal and TBH I really dont think anyone should be charged with shit like "emotional abuse" because of it, thats asinine.
Its an absolutely garbage thing to do but you should not be policed on who you decide to stay with and have sex with.
It's not as if someone can't leave their partner and then do whatever, though.
At the very least it should be listed under a reason for divorce on the grounds for emotional abuse.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941619]It's not as if someone can't leave their partner and then do whatever, though.
At the very least it should be listed under a reason for divorce on the grounds for emotional abuse.[/QUOTE]
But it shouldnt, you should not have to have "emotional abuse" as a claim against you just because you are absolutely sick and tired with whoever you are with, or use it against someone because of the same.
Reason being, it gives too much power to both people, you could just always claim "emotional abuse" it is so blunt you could make it mean pretty much anything.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39941642]But it shouldnt, you should not have to have "emotional abuse" as a claim against you just because you are absolutely sick and tired with whoever you are with, or use it against someone because of the same.
Reason being, it gives too much power to both people, you could just always claim "emotional abuse" it is so blunt you could make it mean pretty much anything.[/QUOTE]
Emotional abuse is actually an array of different, more defined factors, can be something like harassment, subjugation, neglect. You can't really use any of that in court without evidence, though.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;39941434]But if a guy cheats on his wife she can destroy all his things, divorce him, take half of what he has left, plus alimoney and custody rights, and he totally deserves it, right?[/QUOTE]
she doesn't take "half of what he has left". she takes half of her stuff. you are forgetting that marriage implies a lot of shared possessions. this isn't theft, it's people splitting up their possessions.
I'm done with this topic now, as it's going to keep degenerating into name-calling and misrepresented positions with hardly a touch of humanity in the mix.
I've learned quite a bit about this topic, from the actual definition of patriarchy to how skewed an image each "side" has against eachother. Thanks.
I hope people have learned some things from this: It doesn't matter what you label yourself. As long as you're for equality in all matters, whether it be gender or race, you are applying humanity and decency to the argument. I'll ask that you stop vilifying each other. The internet's a really impersonal method of communication, but never forget that there's another person behind the screen and hating them for having a different viewpoint is inhumane and dehumanizing. MRA or Feminist or any other sub-branch or other imprecise label, realize that you're all fighting for the exact same thing and that hating each other for disagreements as small as what constitutes intoxicated rape is unnecessary.
And, lastly, don't call yourself a feminist, or an MRA, or privileged, or unprivileged, nor any other label at all. We're all just humans. Labels like these just create abstract lines of hatred between us. Avoid them and you'll avoid the hatred. Avoid them and you'll see how miniscule the disagreements really are between MRAs and Feminists. There is no war between men and women, there is only a skewed perception and a sad, sad impersonal hatred caused by these labels.
cheating is already a factor in divorce cases
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39941736]cheating is already a factor in divorce cases[/QUOTE]
It isn't held as solid an argument as other forms of mistreatment, in some courts, though.
Psychological crimes or abuses aren't held in as serious a light as other nonviolent though not victimless crimes or abuses, in general, too.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941794]It isn't held as solid an argument as other forms of mistreatment, in some courts, though.
Psychological crimes or abuses aren't held in as serious a light as other nonviolent though not victimless crimes or abuses, in general, too.[/QUOTE]
Its because Psychological crimes are insanely hard to prove, and its good they dont hold up so easy in court, because its so fucking easy to lie about.
If you are going in for psychological crimes then you better bet your ass you have years of proof, medical tests, medication information, documented psychological problems(such as depression which you got from emotional abuse from your partner) actual proof of caused pain and suffering.
Thats why they arent held to a serious light, easy to lie about and insanely hard to prove.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39941846]Its because Psychological crimes are insanely hard to prove, and its good they dont hold up so easy in court, because its so fucking easy to lie about.
If you are going in for psychological crimes then you better bet your ass you have years of proof, medical tests, medication information, documented psychological problems(such as depression which you got from emotional abuse from your partner) actual proof of caused pain and suffering.
Thats why they arent held to a serious light, easy to lie about and insanely hard to prove.[/QUOTE]
Using the impact left on the victim as evidence on the crime isn't necessary to prove it, though it would certainly work to one's advantage in court.
Say, video evidence, physical evidence (pertaining to cases of infidelity, it's how Bill Clinton was caught), or witness testimony of the crime itself is surely to be much more prominently used and easier to obtain.
It isn't harder to prove than other crimes by that large of a stretch, though yeah, it can be lied about easily.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39941910]Using the impact left on the victim as evidence on the crime isn't necessary to prove it, though it would certainly work to one's advantage in court.
Say, video evidence, physical evidence (pertaining to cases of infidelity, it's how Bill Clinton was caught), or witness testimony of the crime itself is surely to be much more prominently used and easier to obtain.
It isn't harder to prove than other crimes by that large of a stretch, though yeah, it can be lied about easily.[/QUOTE]
it's also hard to determine the amount of damage emotional abuse causes. i mean if a dude beats the shit out of his wife you might have broken bones, contusions, things that are physical and can be easily quantified. however, it's harder to prove that depression or trauma can be traced specifically to any instance of mental abuse.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39941946]it's also hard to determine the amount of damage emotional abuse causes. i mean if a dude beats the shit out of his wife you might have broken bones, contusions, things that are physical and can be easily quantified. however, it's harder to prove that depression or trauma can be traced specifically to any instance of mental abuse.[/QUOTE]
As I said, it's easier to prove the crime using the crime itself rather than the damage that has been done.
Things involving betrayal or manipulation usually leave the victim in a state of anger or shock just after they've become disillusioned, and there their behaviour usually isn't concealed all that much. It isn't usually that way when it comes to something like harassment, or isolation, or neglect where the victim is procedurally damaged.
If there is grounded proof that whoever has been screaming at or isolating or betraying whoever, though, isn't it better to base the case or suit off of that instead of how much damage has been done to the victim if it can't be clearly gauged?
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;39942035]As I said, it's easier to prove the crime using the crime itself rather than the damage that has been done.
Things involving betrayal or manipulation usually leave the victim in a state of anger or shock just after they've become disillusioned, and there their behaviour usually isn't concealed all that much. It isn't usually that way when it comes to something like harassment, or isolation, or neglect where the victim is procedurally damaged.
If there is grounded proof that whoever has been screaming at or isolating or betraying whoever, though, isn't it better to base the case or suit off of that instead of how much damage has been done to the victim if it can't be clearly gauged?[/QUOTE]
No its really not, you honestly should not be policed because of fucking screaming or betraying someone you dont care about.
If you are trying to prove any form of mental pain and suffering you need some serious back up, like I said its like that for a reason, they know how easy it is to lie and bullshit that stuff, you cannot see it.
It should not be proof enough because you yell, everyone yells.
Normal feelings like being angry from being betrayed or lied to arent something that would ever hold up in court and its better that way.
All I can say is it's pretty sad that the gaming community has been clamoring for games to be respected as "Real Art" but as soon as someone makes the slightest effort at examining games through the same critical lens as film and literature, gamers throw a gigantic tantrum and suddenly "they're just videogames, stop overthinking everything"
I really hope the culture evolves because the industry is pretty much hamstrung by this pubescent mentality as it is
[QUOTE=TH89;39943340]All I can say is it's pretty sad that the gaming community has been clamoring for games to be respected as "Real Art" but as soon as someone makes the slightest effort at examining games through the same critical lens as film and literature, gamers throw a gigantic tantrum and suddenly "they're just videogames, stop overthinking everything"
I really hope the culture evolves because the industry is pretty much hamstrung by this pubescent mentality as it is[/QUOTE]
that's not what's happening at all. there have been heaps of people criticising games and examining them with varying degrees of success. extra credits, errant signal, action pts are just a few off the top of my head and they do EVERYTHING better than anita.
it's not anti-intellectualism and really it's the opposite, someone who tries to analyse it but fails to make substantial arguments is called out on their stupid shit. no-one would have a problem with anita if she actually made some decent arguments and didn't try and force a narrative. well maybe also if she wasn't so bad at PR but it would certainly help.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;39943387]it's not anti-intellectualism and really it's the opposite, someone who tries to analyse it but fails to make substantial arguments is called out on their stupid shit. no-one would have a problem with anita if she actually made some decent arguments and didn't try and force a narrative. well maybe also if she wasn't so bad at PR but it would certainly help.[/QUOTE]
Most of the shit she's saying is stuff that's blatantly obvious, elementary stuff to anyone who's spent any time reading critical thought on movies or books or whatever other form of art. It's like looking at America's horrible record on health care, education, etc. compared to the rest of the Western world--the games culture is so far behind the curve on this stuff it's embarrassing. So when people go "oh well I sympathize with the general idea but..." and then spend all their energy picking at the minutiae of her arguments and zero energy actually trying to enact the change they claim to be in support of it's hard to see that as anything other than the moderate wing of a, yes, reactionary and anti-intellectual backlash.
[QUOTE=thisispain;39940565]well the important thing is that you found a way to feel superior while posting like an arse and thats good[/QUOTE]
Right back at you :)
[QUOTE=TH89;39943588]Most of the shit she's saying is stuff that's blatantly obvious, elementary stuff to anyone who's spent any time reading critical thought on movies or books or whatever other form of art. It's like looking at America's horrible record on health care, education, etc. compared to the rest of the Western world--the games culture is so far behind the curve on this stuff it's embarrassing. So when people go "oh well I sympathize with the general idea but..." and then spend all their energy picking at the minutiae of her arguments and zero energy actually trying to enact the change they claim to be in support of it's hard to see that as anything other than the moderate wing of a, yes, reactionary and anti-intellectual backlash.[/QUOTE]
there's one major detail that you're missing
[QUOTE=Devodiere;39943387] no-one would have a problem with anita if she actually made some decent arguments and didn't try and force a narrative. well maybe also if she wasn't so bad at PR but it would certainly help.[/QUOTE]
except people were sending her death and rape threats long before she made this video
pretty sure most people made up their minds about her as soon as she said she was going to criticize video games
[QUOTE=TH89;39943588]Most of the shit she's saying is stuff that's blatantly obvious, elementary stuff to anyone who's spent any time reading critical thought on movies or books or whatever other form of art. It's like looking at America's horrible record on health care, education, etc. compared to the rest of the Western world--the games culture is so far behind the curve on this stuff it's embarrassing. So when people go "oh well I sympathize with the general idea but..." and then spend all their energy picking at the minutiae of her arguments and zero energy actually trying to enact the change they claim to be in support of it's hard to see that as anything other than the moderate wing of a, yes, reactionary and anti-intellectual backlash.[/QUOTE]
except they don't just criticise with no energy expended in actually creating and improving, they just take a moment to criticise between doing actual work. even those remaining anonymous who rarely create still make their own efforts towards analysing and criticising poor work in their own way.
as for criticising her, they're more than fair to do so. as you say it's blatantly obvious and news to absolutely no-one so she's hardly helping anything and what actual critique there is is so flawed and narrative driven that it's hard to take seriously. those criticising her aren't reactionary, they differ in ideology and method for how to improve video games and don't want to see her awful arguments become the face for it.
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;39943613]except people were sending her death and rape threats long before she made this video
pretty sure most people made up their minds about her as soon as she said she was going to criticize video games[/QUOTE]
mate you need to learn about how internet trolling works, death and rape threats are the standard. i still hold to my statement about how her awful PR of magnifying trolls and pushing all her critics into this category certainly didn't win any friends and with her awful track record of videos claiming everything was sexist with no real substance behind her arguments, no-one expected much insightful.
she still could've surprised everyone with something insightful and actually progressed shit by making people like thunderfoot come up with far more complex arguments than "someone being imprisoned doesn't remove any and all agency they ever had", people were trying to pick it apart and she could've used that to heighten the discourse, but of course she achieved absolutely nothing and turned it all into a shitstorm. so much for that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
