Neogaf's SJWs defeated: Lucky Chloe is coming to Tekken 7 in North America - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Crimor;46858016]Most of the "sjws" were on neogaf, the shithole that it is.[/QUOTE] I actually read the GAF thread about Chloe and like.... Nothing stood out as "SJW." It was typical nerd outrage with posts like "what a trash design" or "what happened to muh videogames". It felt like a lot of threads I've read here, without the posters I'm used to and the ratings. Another gamer case of nerds calling other nerds something stupid.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;46858109]i think by this point sjw has passed mra in terms of usage on the internet[/QUOTE] The difference is that MRA has an actual set definition. SJW is a term that's vague at best, meaningless at most realistic. As such it's a much more resilient term because, as fulgrim has just covered: the people using it can apply it to pretty much anything they want.

[QUOTE=Xubs;46858068]when did I complain about SJWs? I complained about idiocy and hypocrisy, which is exactly what you're exhibiting.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Xubs;46858110]then simply wallow in your own stupidity, feel free All you ever do with any post you EVER have made since I came to this forum is strawman. It's your modus operandi, and I don't think you have a single right to be complaining about it when it's become your very persona. If anything, strawmanning should be bannable, and this would certainly not exclude you I imagine.[/QUOTE] Look, if all you want to do is call another poster a stupid idiot who should be banned, take it to PM's. You're adding nothing with these personal attacks.

[QUOTE=Xubs;46858110]then simply wallow in your own stupidity, feel free All you ever do with any post you EVER have made since I came to this forum is strawman. It's your modus operandi, and I don't think you have a single right to be complaining about it when it's become your very persona. If anything, strawmanning should be bannable, and this would certainly not exclude you I imagine.[/QUOTE] If you're going to crusade against strawman arguments you should start with the people who use the term "SJW," because they make up the majority of the facepunch SH argument club.

I don't want to throw in on this SJW/Gamers bullshit, because frankly there's very little clear basis for either side to stand on. But "SJW" isn't some catch-all blanket. I understand where some posters are coming from, since it seems that bigots of all flavors are rising against the goodness of progress and sensibility while jabbering with the term "SJW SJW SJW" like some flock of racist crows. However accusing people of identifying "SJW"s of trying to stymie all "leftist" ideas is a blithe simplification of the sort that becomes "If you don't support gay marriage, you're a nazi," or "If you don't vote for Obama you agree with Rick Santorum." It's a claim with absurd overreach that implies a lack of any critical insight. Furthermore accusing "nerds of fighting nerds" is in fact insensitive and hypocritical if you are a person who holds that human dignity and human expression are paramount virtues. Even more if you believe in something which embraces self-assertion like Transexuality. This isn't about strawmen or incivility. It's about a blatant hypocrisy in saying with one side of the mouth that you support people's ideas and freedom of self expression while demeaning them out of the other. The title of this thread is a gag. A [I]lame[/I] gag. If you're trying to decry it, you might as well hunt down Smurfy and string him up for his crimes against SH. If you're going to charge people with taking a statement by a developer with too little salt, then hooray. Poe's Law has once again slain a legion of interneteers! An extreme statement seemed totally reasonable [I]prima facie.[/I]

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858092]Tbh im sick of seeing it because its gotten to the point where its a boogie-man phrase that has lost all real meaning. Are you a moderate feminist?, you're a SJW. Do you dislike a violent video game for whatever reason?, You're SJW. Do you hold literally any opinion on transgender stuff other than "haha i identify as a dolphin!"?, you're a SJW. Do you hold a progressive opinion that i disagree with?, you're a SJW. Whats all this stuff about gay rights? , you must be some sort of SJW. You complained on a forum because you didn't think the anime style of a character fit in a fighting game (or whatever)?, you must be one of those SJWs!. Like, i just saw someone claim "Friendzoned beta males!" were part of the SJW crowd a few pages back, and yet not even a month ago the latest Borderlands game was getting shit for pandering to SJWs, because it made a joke about that very same stereotype.[/QUOTE] Who do you see using SJW as a blanket term with anyone holding any progressive opinions? I honestly feel you yourself are making up your own boogie man. On a side note, I'm very sure that Borderlands thing was not a joke as it was written by someone who firmly believes that. But I could be wrong.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46857676]If you believe any of those exist you need mental help.[/QUOTE] I hope you realize this is actually a real thing, their are guys like that. Why do you think the term Friendzone happened? Its just its turned into a shitfest of a word and label since its used ALL the fucking time, especially on the internet. That mindset seemed pretty god damn common in high school to where you could actually point people out. Its people who think being nice=relationship=sex Except being nice is like only the first step to any relationship, but they skip every other step and think nice will have a girl fall for them. The people who are actually friendzoned are the ones who dont ever think they are in the friendzone. So why would Roca need mental help if he is telling the honest to god truth? Is it really such a wild concept to you?

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46858324]I hope you realize this is actually a real thing, their are guys like that. Why do you think the term Friendzone happened? Its just its turned into a shitfest of a word and label since its used ALL the fucking time, especially on the internet. That mindset seemed pretty god damn common in high school to where you could actually point people out. Its people who think being nice=relationship=sex Except being nice is like only the first step to any relationship, but they skip every other step and think nice will have a girl fall for them. The people who are actually friendzoned are the ones who dont ever think they are in the friendzone. So why would Roca need mental help if he is telling the honest to god truth? Is it really such a wild concept to you?[/QUOTE] The entire concept of friendzone is completely flawed and makes almost no sense. If a girl doesn't like you that way but is willing to tlak to you, you got friendzoned? No it means you'r either fucking creepy or she just doesn't like you like that. You can probably push and get her eventually if you have good moves, but that's not some sort of miraculous 'zone' that people fall in. If a person asked me out and I said no but I was fine with being their friend, that's not being in some sort of zone, that's just not being attracted. It's become a catchall term for creepy guys to whine about women putting them in the friendzone and dating 'assholes' when in reality they're just dating the guy who isn't creepy and stalking the internet, complaining about women.

[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;46858298]Who do you see using SJW as a blanket term with anyone holding any progressive opinions? I honestly feel you yourself are making up your own boogie man. On a side note, I'm very sure that Borderlands thing was not a joke as it was written by someone who firmly believes that. But I could be wrong.[/QUOTE] You are missing the point; the fact that both someone who laughs at the whole "doing-nice-things-for-girls-for-the-misguided-ulterior-motive-that-you-will-be-owed-sex" crowd, and someone actually thinks that way can both be defined as "SJW" is testament to just how vague and meaningless the term has become.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;46853874]I thought that a right wing ideology was "I'm/we're more superior that you"[/QUOTE] No, that's eugenetic racism. Right-Wing Conservative ideology can be summed up, crudely and basically, as "The old ways is the best ways." Conservatives believe in the good old days, and hope to return to the values of whatever they believe was a golden age.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858092]Tbh im sick of seeing it because its gotten to the point where its a boogie-man phrase that has lost all real meaning. Are you a moderate feminist?, you're a SJW. Do you dislike a violent video game for whatever reason?, You're SJW. Do you hold literally any opinion on transgender stuff other than "haha i identify as a dolphin!"?, you're a SJW. Do you hold a progressive opinion that i disagree with?, you're a SJW. Whats all this stuff about gay rights? , you must be some sort of SJW. You complained on a forum because you didn't think the anime style of a character fit in a fighting game (or whatever)?, you must be one of those SJWs!. Like, i just saw someone claim "Friendzoned beta males!" were part of the SJW crowd a few pages back, and yet not even a month ago the latest Borderlands game was getting shit for pandering to SJWs, because it made a joke about that very same stereotype.[/QUOTE] Well shit if that's the actual definition then I must be one heck of a SJW. I don't think it is, though, nor have I seen it used with such a broad meaning on the internet much. I think it's a spot on denomination for a certain kind of persons, specifically people who care more about appearing "politically correct" and "progressive" rather than actually helping society to go further. More precisely, the kind who blissfully engage in hypocritical behavior regarding these topics and prefer to see opponents as boogeymen rather than engaging in rational debate. Here's a quote from another thread about why I think it's a fitting title for them: [QUOTE]That's a pretty fitting denomination, I think. It's as pure an oxymoron as it gets; you don't spread tolerance by waging war, you do so by being civil and by proving your point through rational debate. Why do you think the most well-known and successful social movements are non-violent ones? Because it's more efficient to make people tolerant towards you by showing your humanity than by hurting and humiliating them. These people are a travesty to social progress, they adopt a scapegoat mentality not because it actually further their pretended goal, but because it strengthen their cultish structure. No genuinely progressive people would identify as that.[/QUOTE] If you want to prove the validity of an ideology, you have to stay critical towards it, not hold every of its aspects as some sorts of holy scriptures. All in all, to me the SJW title represents the bad seeds who are actually detrimental towards social progression by misinforming people about what it means rather than your average social justice supporter they should learn a thing or two from.

[QUOTE=Xubs;46858110]then simply wallow in your own stupidity, feel free All you ever do with any post you EVER have made since I came to this forum is strawman. It's your modus operandi, and I don't think you have a single right to be complaining about it when it's become your very persona. If anything, strawmanning should be bannable, and this would certainly not exclude you I imagine.[/QUOTE] no one actually identifies w/ the "sjw" label - it's thrown onto people. what's there to "strawman" about people who actually do this

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858396]You are missing the point; the fact that both someone who laughs at the whole "doing-nice-things-for-girls-for-the-misguided-ulterior-motive-that-you-will-be-owed-sex" crowd, and someone actually thinks that way can both be defined as "SJW" is testament to just how vague and meaningless the term has become.[/QUOTE] So one person using the term wrong is testament makes the entire term meaningless? That's pretty strange logic. Also before reaching the "What the- My niceness got me no sex, these woman are doing it wrong" stage some of those men go into white knighting White knighting is actually seen as a good thing by SJWs, because woman are blindly defended regardless of context. That might be a reason a person would call a male like that an SJW.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858396]You are missing the point; the fact that both someone who laughs at the whole "doing-nice-things-for-girls-for-the-misguided-ulterior-motive-that-you-will-be-owed-sex" crowd, and someone actually thinks that way can both be defined as "SJW" is testament to just how vague and meaningless the term has become.[/QUOTE] or, get this, use your head and determine its most likely talking about middle/upper class judgemental assholes who have to get on their horses about "equality" and censor others people's media because they have to find something, anything offensive to them or others. aka this generation's soccer moms.

[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;46858489]So one person using the term wrong is testament makes the entire term meaningless? That's pretty strange logic. Also before reaching the "What the- My niceness got me no sex, these woman are doing it wrong" stage some of those men go into white knighting White knighting is actually seen as a good thing by SJWs, because woman are blindly defended regardless of context. That might be a reason a person would call a male like that an SJW.[/QUOTE] lol this is such a black and white description of people

[QUOTE=Ownederd;46858503]lol this is such a black and white description of people[/QUOTE] Care to explain why?

SH should be renamed as Mass Debate, cause people come for the title and stay for the useless arguing.

[QUOTE=DeeCeeTeeBee;46853610]Depictions of women like this influence white male gamers and white men who play games that don't identify as gamers. Virtual fantasy not real depictions of women like this makes them more likely to commit acts of rape, objectification and general misogyny against real, physical women.[/QUOTE] That is a tall claim that has never been proven, just like video games causing violence.

Whats even offensive about this character? Because she's dressed like a cat? [img_thumb]http://sickr.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cat_peach_super_mario_3d_world.jpg[/img_thumb] omg boycott nintendo!!!

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858092]Tbh im sick of seeing it because its gotten to the point where its a boogie-man phrase that has lost all real meaning. Are you a moderate feminist?, you're a SJW. Do you dislike a violent video game for whatever reason?, You're SJW. Do you hold literally any opinion on transgender stuff other than "haha i identify as a dolphin!"?, you're a SJW. Do you hold a progressive opinion that i disagree with?, you're a SJW. Whats all this stuff about gay rights? , you must be some sort of SJW. You complained on a forum because you didn't think the anime style of a character fit in a fighting game (or whatever)?, you must be one of those SJWs!. Like, i just saw someone claim "Friendzoned beta males!" were part of the SJW crowd a few pages back, and yet not even a month ago the latest Borderlands game was getting shit for pandering to SJWs, because it made a joke about that very same stereotype.[/QUOTE] Fair enough. I suppose it's become a bit of a buzzword, unfortunately. I personally became aware of the term when GG started up, and I've really only seen it used (and personally used it) to describe left leaning radicals. I still have no problem using the term in that regard, but as someone who identifies as a moderate feminist, using SJW to label any of what you described, or anything other than radical leftists, is just dumb. [QUOTE=ColdAsRice;46858778]SH should be renamed as Mass Debate, cause people come for the title and stay for the useless arguing.[/QUOTE] I enjoy the debate. It might have some toxic members involved sometimes but overall it's a great place to ask questions and expand your understanding on certain subjects.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858092]Tbh im sick of seeing it because its gotten to the point where its a boogie-man phrase that has lost all real meaning. Are you a moderate feminist?, you're a SJW. Do you dislike a violent video game for whatever reason?, You're SJW. Do you hold literally any opinion on transgender stuff other than "haha i identify as a dolphin!"?, you're a SJW. Do you hold a progressive opinion that i disagree with?, you're a SJW. Whats all this stuff about gay rights? , you must be some sort of SJW. You complained on a forum because you didn't think the anime style of a character fit in a fighting game (or whatever)?, you must be one of those SJWs!. Like, i just saw someone claim "Friendzoned beta males!" were part of the SJW crowd a few pages back, and yet not even a month ago the latest Borderlands game was getting shit for pandering to SJWs, because it made a joke about that very same stereotype.[/QUOTE] So you don't think the people on Neogaf would unironically identify as a social justice warrior because they care about the depiction of Lucky Chloe in Tekken 7? The thing that pisses me off are the people saying "he made the right decision by taking her out of the game" aren't even going to buy the game and were never going to buy the fucking game in the first place. Also I gave Borderlands the memesequel shit because it was the most unfunny garbage I've ever seen that was forced into the game because Cuckold Burch had one of his infamous autistic rants on paper while writing the game's dialog. [video=youtube;lG_VItFUEEI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG_VItFUEEI[/video]

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;46859412]Whats even offensive about this character? Because she's dressed like a cat? [img_thumb]http://sickr.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cat_peach_super_mario_3d_world.jpg[/img_thumb] omg boycott nintendo!!![/QUOTE] It's because she's a huge weeb who is intentionally annoying. Apparently that's too out there for the game with a man made of logs, a robot samurai, a kangaroo, a man with a tiger head, a robot version of the man with a tiger head, a farting mini t-rex, and multiple men who get possessed by/turn into a demon.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46858092]Tbh im sick of seeing it because its gotten to the point where its a boogie-man phrase that has lost all real meaning. Are you a moderate feminist?, you're a SJW. Do you dislike a violent video game for whatever reason?, You're SJW. Do you hold literally any opinion on transgender stuff other than "haha i identify as a dolphin!"?, you're a SJW. Do you hold a progressive opinion that i disagree with?, you're a SJW. Whats all this stuff about gay rights? , you must be some sort of SJW. You complained on a forum because you didn't think the anime style of a character fit in a fighting game (or whatever)?, you must be one of those SJWs!. Like, i just saw someone claim "Friendzoned beta males!" were part of the SJW crowd a few pages back, and yet not even a month ago the latest Borderlands game was getting shit for pandering to SJWs, because it made a joke about that very same stereotype.[/QUOTE] It's almost as if any term that was ever used to apply to certain category of people became a buzzword inappropriately used to describe just about anyone someone doesn't really like. I agree that the term became a buzzword. But that's sorta what always happens to something large crowd picks up on.

Oh, I bet you've heard this one before. How to start a argument on Facepunch. Post in SH. Wait. And watch the stupidity unfold before your very own eyes.

[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;46859412]Whats even offensive about this character? Because she's dressed like a cat? [img_thumb]http://sickr.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cat_peach_super_mario_3d_world.jpg[/img_thumb] omg boycott nintendo!!![/QUOTE] People missed the joke about the character (ie she's an intentionally obnoxious parody of typical weaboo trash) and started crying about it like it would somehow ruin Tekken until the director of the series started making fun of these same people for being such crybabies. And then people missed the guy's joke about replacing the character with a skinhead and thought it was real, like a japanese dev team would somehow take the effort and time needed to make a full character (even if it's just a reskin) for a very specific part of the market.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;46858795]That is a tall claim that has never been proven, just like video games causing violence.[/QUOTE] who needs proof when i have [del]ignorance[/del] social justice on my side?

[QUOTE=DeeCeeTeeBee;46853610]Depictions of women like this influence white male gamers and white men who play games that don't identify as gamers. Virtual fantasy not real depictions of women like this makes them more likely to commit acts of rape, objectification and general misogyny against real, physical women. That's why this incredibly touhou character was shunned by a bunch of people.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=DeeCeeTeeBee;46860806]who needs proof when i have [del]ignorance[/del] social justice on my side?[/QUOTE] I feel like you're not being ironic here.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46857992]There sure may be, but also bear in mind that, there are certain inequalities to consider when talking about a broad social picture and how we understand and record violence. For instance, women tend to serve shorter prison terms and on some accounts have a lower chance of being convicted. Men tend to commit suicide more successfully and more often than women do. When we blow things out to a broad sociological picture, we introduce a lot of compounds to the experiment and there is very little that gives us a way to causally illustrate that Masculinity causes Violence.[/quote] while differential levels of reporting and conviction are definitely factors, you already know that it isn't the only factor, and the discrepancies are pretty big. i wouldn't consider 'masculinity' the origin point per se but more that masculinity is prone to condone or even require aggressive behavior in both conflict resolution and in pursuit of one's goals. when talking about conflict resolution in general, the cultural expectation, even ideal, is for a male to be "strong" and powerful and unwaiveringly in support of their own goals. it wouldn't be hard to find someone even in american society who would call you a pussy for wanting to sit down and talk about a dispute instead of shouting or coming to blows over it. one illustrative example and common literary trope is a male protagonist being on a date with someone, wherein some stranger begins to pick on him or his date in an attempt to provoke him into a fight, the result either being the protagonist entering and winning a fight and being a hero or yielding or failing at said fight and being a loser. not to mention that the end to nearly everything in the massive genre of action is the protagonist killing/humiliating/berating the antagonist or some other enemy. now, of course, it's media and not an exact reflection of real life, but media provides social scripts and either solidifies or subverts norms with its content, and in the absence of real life interaction, media ends up becoming a basis of reality for some people. [quote]Does masculinity explain why women are treated preferentially in the justice system, albeit implicitly?[/quote] because women are still subtly considered more fragile creatures that are less capable of heinous acts, and it's harder to crush what appears to one to be a ladybug than a roach. this isn't explicit sexism, though, it's just a persistent throwback from attitudes and ideas from an era that is long gone. [QUOTE]Does masculinity explain why men are more likely to take their own lives, and that they're more able to?[/QUOTE] men often use methods that more likely ensure death like hanging and firearms, whereas women are more likely to use methods like poisoning that have substantially higher survival rates. [url]http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-20/why-do-more-men-commit-suicide[/url] [quote]Masculinity may be a factor. Analogously the concept of [I]Loco[/I] certainly is a factor for violent crime in Barrio culture, where gradual escalation and self one-upping leads to an individual committing casual acts of violence to reinforce an image of unpredictability and freedom. However it's just not clear to me that "masculine" culture is a driving cause unless you either define Masculinity so broadly that it may be synonymous with "human condition" or so narrowly that you're effectively ONLY pointing to cases like Elliot. Masculinity may be the cause at the end of the day, for some certain value of the word. However I am nowhere near convinced, even weakly, that it is the smoking gun of our society. At best it's another beatboard like comic books, rock music and videogames.[/QUOTE] the problem, as I mentioned, is not the word or the concept of masculinity itself but instead the aggressive behavior that masculinity might mandate, and the punishments that some men might face from their peers for not being masculine enough. after all, the expectation and requirement of 'masculinity' has been an origin point of many a men being marginalized if not attacked in the past for being too 'feminine'. thankfully, that time period is in some if not most ways behind us.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46857612]I'm a page late and a dollar short but I want to toss in on this notion that masculinity "causes" violence. Flatly put, there is no causal connection. Here, let's look at this person: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Solanas[/url] Valerie Solanas, for those of you too lazy to read, was the pioneer of third wave feminism. She wrote the [I]SCUM Manifesto[/I] which advocated for a women-dominated society where men would be little more than fissible sexual material. She stalked, and shot Andy Warhol and was one of the primary causes of his withdrawl from Art making and the public circle. Can I argue that feminism caused her attacks? She explicitly [I]said[/I] they did. If you hold Elliot Rodger to be a "product of masculinity" then you must also admit that Valerie Solanas' agenda of violence and psycopathy was a "product of feminism." I doubt anyone wants to commit to such a claim.[/QUOTE] Not that I disagree with your overall point on masculinity, but your facts about Valeria Solanas and feminism are a bit off. If you meant to use feminism as the antithesis of masculinity then that's problematic because feminism and femininity aren't exactly synonymous. Unless that wasn't your point and you're just attacking the absurdity of the claim in which case, fair point. Also, I wasn't too lazy to read. Valeria Solanas was batshit crazy but saying she "was the pioneer of third wave feminism" is flat out wrong. The Wikipedia page you linked as proof says literally nothing about third-wave feminism. Neither does the one on third-wave feminism itself, it actually lists Rebecca Walker. That movement started around the early 90s, after Solanas' death in 88. Her actions and ideas made her a pioneer of [I]radical[/I] feminism, but that isn't the same thing. It irks me that there's a growing misconception and stigma that third-wave feminism just means man-hating and I'd hate to see Solanas get lumped in with that. Third-wave feminism mainly focuses on individuality as opposed to a collective female experience that all women share. It also focuses on female empowerment, which doesn't always mean male disempowerment. The empowerment part is the only real parallel between Solanas and third-wave feminism but she takes it to a radical extent. (By the way, if anyone's interested Harada's [url=http://www.joystiq.com/2015/01/04/tekken-7-director-reveals-new-fighter-tries-to-clear-up-lucky-c/]unveiled the Saudi Arabian fighter[/url] he spoke of a while back.)

[QUOTE=Korova;46859657] Also I gave Borderlands the memesequel shit because it was the most unfunny garbage I've ever seen that was forced into the game because Cuckold Burch had one of his infamous autistic rants on paper while writing the game's dialog. [/QUOTE] Ok, we get it, you really don't like one of the games writers. you can stop now. Considering how mad it seems to have made you, you don't know a whole lot about the game itself, burch had a significantly smaller part in writing the pre-sequel and the writers at 2k Australia threw out the internet meme jokes stuff completely (to the extent they even jokingly listed "no more lame internet memes!" as a feature in one of the games trailers). As for making fun of people who complain about "the friendzone!", so what? it [i] is [/i] a pretty dumb concept.