Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > Halls of Lordaeron

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1076  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:04 AM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
Not helping.
It is the kind of comment that gets attention and acknowledgement.
Reply With Quote
  #1077  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:07 AM
Exxile87 Exxile87 is offline

Elune
Exxile87's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: One nation, under Bloo
Posts: 7,656
BattleTag: Exxile87#1525
Send a message via AIM to Exxile87 Send a message via Yahoo to Exxile87

Default

With all the REAL problems in the world, THIS is the shit that gets attention.
__________________
Khadgar: Prepare to heroically CTRL-E through the portal with me!
Reply With Quote
  #1078  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:08 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Venom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
Would you care to explain how "!(x → y)" is a fallacious response to "x → y"?
I see no fallacy, but it's not a very effective or meaningful contradiction. All it does is indicate persons A and B are operating from different premises.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exxile87 View Post
Does anyone else kind of want to put their dick in Anita Sarkeesian, just to see what it'd be like to fuck a corpse without committing felony necrophilia?
I think that's just you, dude.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #1079  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:10 AM
Kellick Kellick is offline

Site Staff - Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 12,052
BattleTag: Pyrolithic#1538

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
I see no fallacy, but it's not a very effective or meaningful contradiction. All it does is indicate persons A and B are operating from different premises.
If the first premise is demonstrably incorrect, then that's a pretty meaningful contradiction.
Reply With Quote
  #1080  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:11 AM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exxile87 View Post
With all the REAL problems in the world, THIS is the shit that gets attention.
This is a stupid argument.


Oh I know! Lets all JUST worry about the heat death of the universe, cause that's the only REAL problem.


Your bullshit about how "Oh this isn't a -real- problem" is meaningless.

People care about this.

People argue about this.

People discuss this.

If you don't have the brain or the guts to discuss it civilly then just don't fucking post about it and don't act like whiny that other people have the AUDACITY to talk about social issues you don't think are important because you don't feel like they affect your life personally you moldy 12 year old ratcheese taco.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #1081  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:12 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Venom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
If the first premise is demonstrably incorrect, then that's a pretty meaningful contradiction.
But you're expected to demonstrate it if that's the case. You can just say 'you're wrong,' but it packs more punch if you explain why and how.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #1082  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:25 AM
SmokeBlader SmokeBlader is offline

Elune
SmokeBlader's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 30,980

Default

Video games being a primary target of feminism really shows how oppressed American women are.
Reply With Quote
  #1083  
Old 11-10-2014, 07:41 AM
Kellick Kellick is offline

Site Staff - Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 12,052
BattleTag: Pyrolithic#1538

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
But you're expected to demonstrate it if that's the case.
And that is exactly the point of a "Not all men" argument: To demonstrate that a given universal statement is untrue.

No amount of smarmy comics making fun of the interjection will ever make the universal statement true, nor does it make the act of contesting a patently false premise a fallacy.
Reply With Quote
  #1084  
Old 11-10-2014, 08:04 AM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
Video games being a primary target of feminism really shows how oppressed American women are.
The US is a good place to be a woman.
Reply With Quote
  #1085  
Old 11-10-2014, 08:23 AM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,527

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
Video games being a primary target of feminism really shows how oppressed American women are.
You mean the primary one discussed on a video game forum?
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #1086  
Old 11-10-2014, 09:18 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Venom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
And that is exactly the point of a "Not all men" argument: To demonstrate that a given universal statement is untrue.

No amount of smarmy comics making fun of the interjection will ever make the universal statement true, nor does it make the act of contesting a patently false premise a fallacy.
Oooh, you mean Person A says ∀X(X→Y) and Person B says ∃X¬(X→Y)
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #1087  
Old 11-10-2014, 09:27 AM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Did you guys learn something new today?
Reply With Quote
  #1088  
Old 11-10-2014, 09:41 AM
Nazja Nazja is offline

Trade Baroness - Admin
Nazja's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: All the lands of Wonder.
Posts: 40,968

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Oooh, you mean Person A says ∀X(X→Y) and Person B says ∃X¬(X→Y)
Yes.
Reply With Quote
  #1089  
Old 11-10-2014, 09:55 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellick View Post
And that is exactly the point of a "Not all men" argument: To demonstrate that a given universal statement is untrue.

No amount of smarmy comics making fun of the interjection will ever make the universal statement true, nor does it make the act of contesting a patently false premise a fallacy.
But it's not a universal statement. As an interjection, "not all men" presumes that the subject is "all men," when in fact "I hate it when men do X" implies in its statement that it's obviously not all men, but a subset. Therefore the interjection of "not all men" is a complete red herring that moves the conversation away from the actual topic at hand for a non-point.
Reply With Quote
  #1090  
Old 11-10-2014, 10:02 AM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
But it's not a universal statement. As an interjection, "not all men" presumes that the subject is "all men," when in fact "I hate it when men do X" implies in its statement that it's obviously not all men, but a subset. Therefore the interjection of "not all men" is a complete red herring that moves the conversation away from the actual topic at hand for a non-point.
Just tell men you love them when they feel offended!

I do think interpreting someone's statement as a default to be an extreme to be unfair though. Most people will not take extreme and absolutist positions because they are easily disproved.
Reply With Quote
  #1091  
Old 11-10-2014, 10:06 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

For example, let's say two people were discussing bicyclists.
Person 1: "I hate when bicyclists conveniently pick and choose when to abide by road traffic laws."
Person 2: "Not all bicyclists!"

Of course not all bicyclists do that. "Not all bicyclists," as an interjection, would be an argument of bad faith, even by a bicyclist.
Reply With Quote
  #1092  
Old 11-10-2014, 10:10 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Venom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
But it's not a universal statement. As an interjection, "not all men" presumes that the subject is "all men," when in fact "I hate it when men do X" implies in its statement that it's obviously not all men, but a subset. Therefore the interjection of "not all men" is a complete red herring that moves the conversation away from the actual topic at hand for a non-point.
In the circumstances you construct, this is true. However, there are those in the feminist camp who are less logically responsible than you are, and these people will at times makes universal statements, to which the natural response is an exasperated 'not all men.'
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #1093  
Old 11-10-2014, 10:13 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
In the circumstances you construct, this is true. However, there are those in the feminist camp who are less logically responsible than you are, and these people will at times makes universal statements, to which the natural response is an exasperated 'not all men.'
I would probably avoid using the phrase "not all men" though, but instead comment on its shortcomings as a universal statement or generalization.
Reply With Quote
  #1094  
Old 11-10-2014, 10:20 AM
Sagara Sagara is offline

Arch-Druid
Sagara's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,269
BattleTag: Sagara#2842

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
I would probably avoid using the phrase "not all men" though, but instead comment on its shortcomings as a universal statement or generalization.
True. Apologies for jumping in, but then I wonder, why is the answer to a problematic "not all men" to use a "yes all women" that has the same shortcomings?

My opinion is that many of the current troubles can be related back to choddy and miscommunications on all sides - People not caring to or not wanting to have a civil discussion because the other side "isn't worthy".
Reply With Quote
  #1095  
Old 11-10-2014, 11:47 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,288

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagara View Post
True. Apologies for jumping in, but then I wonder, why is the answer to a problematic "not all men" to use a "yes all women" that has the same shortcomings?
I'm not entirely sure if it has the same shortcomings. Despite the similar phrasing, the two phrases seem to respond to two different behaviors or social contexts. #NotAllMen is a response to

#NotAllWomen seems to involve more the reality that all women are subjected to sexism, misogyny, and patriarchy in society, albeit to varying degrees and extremes.

If people want to follow up about #NotAllMen, I actually recommend this editorial - "Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude's Favorite Argument" - that talks about its history. In particular, there's an interesting bit about how 'not all men' represents in itself a shift in the discourse around sexism from where it was.

Quote:
“Not all men” also differs from “what about the men?” and other classic derails because it acknowledges that rape, sexism, and misogyny are real issues — just not, you know, real issues that the speaker is involved with in any way. The “not all men” man, at least in some cases, agrees with you and is perfectly willing to talk about how terrible those other guys are, just as soon as we get done establishing that he himself would never be such a cad. It’s infuriating and unhelpful, but in a way it represents a weird kind of progress.

Lubchansky agreed that the shift from “but what about men’s problems” to “not all men are like that” paralleled his own gradual development into a decent human. Perhaps men arguing on the Internet (though not all men!) follow a developmental path that echoes an individual man growing a social conscience, which in a very simplified form goes something like this:

1. Sexism is a fake idea invented by feminists
2. Sexism happens, but the effect of “reverse sexism” on men is as bad or worse
3. Sexism happens, but the important part is that I personally am not sexist
4. Sexism happens, and I benefit from that whether or not I personally am sexist
5. Sexism happens, I benefit from it, I am unavoidably sexist sometimes because I was socialized that way, and if I want to be anti-sexist I have to be actively working against that socialization
Quote:
My opinion is that many of the current troubles can be related back to choddy and miscommunications on all sides - People not caring to or not wanting to have a civil discussion because the other side "isn't worthy".
Is this pertaining to #GamerGate or more generally?
Reply With Quote
  #1096  
Old 11-10-2014, 12:21 PM
Sagara Sagara is offline

Arch-Druid
Sagara's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,269
BattleTag: Sagara#2842

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
I'm not entirely sure if it has the same shortcomings. Despite the similar phrasing, the two phrases seem to respond to two different behaviors or social contexts. #NotAllMen is a response to

#NotAllWomen seems to involve more the reality that all women are subjected to sexism, misogyny, and patriarchy in society, albeit to varying degrees and extremes.

If people want to follow up about #NotAllMen, I actually recommend this editorial - "Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude's Favorite Argument" - that talks about its history. In particular, there's an interesting bit about how 'not all men' represents in itself a shift in the discourse around sexism from where it was.
The "Notallmen" vs "Yesallwomen" are both oversimplifications of complex issues. Both are infantilizing, and while appropriate for the most extreme on both side, feel more like a 10,000 ft view of the problem. So in this way, yeah, they're comparable and both deserve to be ditched and replaced by something more respectful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
Is this pertaining to #GamerGate or more generally?
I actually sometimes consider that a core part of my thought process. I believe many dispute have more to do with unwillingness to discuss for various reasons than actual incompatible views.

In the end, most debates bog down to the edge cases more than the core issues.
Reply With Quote
  #1097  
Old 11-10-2014, 01:00 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

http://online.wsj.com/articles/harve...rts-1415573959

This article is relevant to Gamergate. It is about how don't understand the concept of a free exchange of ideas and instead try to censor anyone that says something they may disagree with. It is an extremely narrow minded way of thinking that creates cloistered people that simply don't know how to interact with anyone that thinks differently than them.

Quote:
On campuses across the country, hostility toward unpopular ideas has become so irrational that many students, and some faculty members, now openly oppose freedom of speech. The hypersensitive consider the mere discussion of the topic of censorship to be potentially traumatic. Those who try to protect academic freedom and the ability of the academy to discuss the world as it is are swimming against the current. In such an atmosphere, liberal-arts education can’t survive.

Consider what happened after Smith College held a panel for alumnae titled “Challenging the Ideological Echo Chamber: Free Speech, Civil Discourse and the Liberal Arts.” Moderated by Smith President Kathleen McCartney in late September, the panel was an apparent effort to address the intolerance of diverse opinions that prevails on many campuses.

One panelist was Smith alumna Wendy Kaminer—an author, lawyer, social critic, feminist, First Amendment near-absolutist and former board member of the American Civil Liberties Union. She delivered precisely the spirited challenge to the echo chamber that the panel’s title seemed to invite. But Ms. Kaminer emerged from the discussion of free speech labeled a racist—for defending free speech.

The panel started innocuously enough with Ms. Kaminer criticizing the proliferation of campus speech codes that restrict supposedly offensive language. She urged the audience to defend the free exchange of ideas over parochial notions of “civility.” In response to a question about teaching materials that contain “hate speech,” she raised the example of Mark Twain ’s “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” arguing that students should take it as a whole. The student member of the panel, Jaime Estrada, resisted that notion, saying, “But it has the n-word, and some people are sensitive to that.”

Ms. Kaminer responded: “Well let’s talk about n-words. Let’s talk about the growing lexicon of words that can only be known by their initials. I mean, when I say, ‘n-word’ or when Jaime says ‘n-word,’ what word do you all hear in your head? You hear the word . . . ”

And then Ms. Kaminer crossed the Rubicon of political correctness and uttered the forbidden word, observing that having uttered it, “nothing horrible happened.” She then compared the trend of replacing potentially offensive words with an initial to being “characters in a Harry Potter book who are afraid to say the word ‘Voldemort.’ ” There’s an important difference, she pointed out, between hurling an epithet and uttering a forbidden word during an academic discussion of our attitudes toward language and law.

The event—and Ms. Kaminer’s words—prompted blowback from Smith undergraduates, recent alumnae and some faculty members. One member of the audience posted an audio recording and transcript of the discussion, preceded by what has come to be known in the academic world as a “trigger warning”:

“Trigger/Content Warnings: Racism/racial slurs, abelist slurs, anti-Semitic language, anti-Muslim/Islamophobic language, anti-immigrant language, sexist/misogynistic slurs, references to race-based violence.”

One has to have imbibed this culture of hyper-victimization in order even to understand the lingo. “Ableism,” for example, is described at ableism.org as “the practices and dominant attitudes in society that devalue and limit the potential of persons with disabilities” and that “assign inferior value (worth) to persons who have developmental, emotional, physical or psychiatric disabilities.”

The contretemps prompted articles in the newspapers of Smith College and neighboring Mount Holyoke College, condemning Ms. Kaminer’s remarks as examples of institutionalized racism. Smith president Ms. McCartney was criticized for not immediately denouncing Ms. Kaminer. In a Sept. 29 letter responding to the Smith community, she apologized to students and faculty who were “hurt” and made to feel “unsafe” by Ms. Kaminer’s comments in defense of free speech.

A rare academic counter-current to the vast censorial wave came from professor of politics Christopher Pyle at Mount Holyoke. He wrote in the Mount Holyoke News that readers of the paper were misled by a report that “a Smith alumna made racist remarks when speaking at an alumnae panel.” He criticized the condemnation of Ms. Kaminer for her willingness to challenge the tyranny of “sanitary euphemisms.”

Smith is not the epicenter of hostility to free speech. On university campuses nationwide we are witnessing an increasing tide of trigger warnings. They are popping up on syllabi, in discussions of public art, and even finding their way into official school policies.

On Oct. 27, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology circulated a survey questionnaire to its entire student body on the issue of sexual assault—a so-called “climate survey” to try to determine and expose the extent of the problem at the school. Remarkably enough, the survey itself came accompanied by, guess what:

“TRIGGER WARNING: Some of the questions in this survey use explicit language, including anatomical names of body parts and specific behaviors to ask about sexual situations. This survey also asks about sexual assault and other forms of sexual violence which may be upsetting. Resources for support will be available on every page of the survey, should you need them.”

Hypersensitivity to the trauma allegedly inflicted by listening to controversial ideas approaches a strange form of derangement—a disorder whose lethal spread in academia grows by the day. What should be the object of derision, a focus for satire, is instead the subject of serious faux academic discussion and precautionary warnings. For this disorder there is no effective quarantine. A whole generation of students soon will have imbibed the warped notions of justice and entitlement now handed down as dogma in the universities.
Reply With Quote
  #1098  
Old 11-10-2014, 01:32 PM
Insipid_Lobster Insipid_Lobster is offline

Eternal
Insipid_Lobster's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Yolkshur
Posts: 3,743
BattleTag: InsipidLobst#2126

Default

The results of David Rosen(@wolfire) and John Baine (TotalBiscuit) speaking to one another privately after a brief spat on twitter.

"After an unfortunate heated exchange on Twitter, we had a private talk over Skype, and found that we share a lot of common ground. Our only real point of disagreement was how to react to a certain hashtag, and we agreed that it is probably best to just never speak of it by name again, especially on Twitter. This is not a medium that promotes calm and nuanced discourse about complex issues: the constant barrage of hate took a toll on both of us, and we both said things that we wish we could take back. Since we both have our own significant social media followings, hashtags are not necessary for us. We both have the privileged position of being heard by many.

Here are some topics that we both agree on:

It is important to promote consumer rights and journalistic ethics, both by supporting consumer friendly policies (like refund policies and DRM-free builds), and by disclosing relevant contact with developers that might color an article or review. The best way for consumers to help is to simply support sites that do this well, and avoid sites that do not.

Harassment of any kind is unacceptable, and there are three ways to effectively combat it. First, we can all expand the conversation started by the victims of this harassment so that there are too many targets to attack effectively, while focusing on the issues and freezing out trolls who would seek to derail the discussion.

Second, we can all push for reform of systems that allow this harassment to occur, such as the lax evidence requirements for SWAT raids.

Lastly, we can ask that social media services provide new tools that allow users to filter out harassment, such as the ability to automatically mute tweets from new accounts, and filter out specific words, phrases and links. Policing all of Twitter is an impossible task, but as it stands, the tools for shielding oneself from persistent trolls are woefully lacking and could use a serious upgrade. Freedom not to listen is just as important as freedom of speech: you cannot unread something.

Diversity is important among game creators, players, and characters, and this is an important conversation that must be encouraged, not punished. Diversity leads to better stories, better stories lead to better games. If someone posts an article or video that you disagree with, the correct response is to write a comment, write to the editor, or create your own opposing article or video. It is not appropriate to threaten his or her safety, family, or anything else along those lines.

Variety of perspective and critique is important to the consumer. However, Metacritic strips away all of this nuance and context to create simplistic aggregated scores which have real consequences within the industry. If you want to claim a game is sexist that is entirely your right, but we both believe that scores should be abolished from all reviews to allow personal opinion to be just that, and not representative of an entire site, particularly when staff may not share that view. Removing scores and the relevance of Metacritic allows reviews to stand on their own merits, and declaws the arguments caused by disagreement with an arbitrary score.

The gamer identity is very much alive, and very important to a lot of people. For many of us it was the first place that we found acceptance and a sense of belonging, and it grew into a passion that influenced many aspects of our lives. It should not be dismissed so lightly. Gamers have endured attacks from the mainstream media for decades and we should be doing everything we can to bring that ignorance to an end, not further fuel it with incendiary rhetoric.

It seems that almost everyone on both sides agrees about these fundamental points, but we have all become polarized beyond reason by the medium we have used to discuss it. The next time you consider writing an angry message to someone on the other side of this issue, please go for a walk and cool off for a few minutes, and then see if you still think that is the best use of your time. Perhaps it would be more productive to pursue one of these goals that we all agree would improve gaming for everyone.

Thank you for reading."
Reply With Quote
  #1099  
Old 11-10-2014, 04:10 PM
Taintedmage Taintedmage is offline

Eternal
Taintedmage's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,809

Default

I don't want to live in a world that is a bubble which is scrubbed clean because of peoples insensitivities.

If you can't handle it, there's always the freedom to leave.

The modern world has become one where people demand that the world should change instead of accepting and striving to create a place for themselves in the world.
Reply With Quote
  #1100  
Old 11-10-2014, 04:17 PM
Ragnahar Ragnahar is offline

Poor Soldier
Ragnahar's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 12,430
BattleTag: Mathias#1221

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taintedmage View Post
I don't want to live in a world that is a bubble which is scrubbed clean because of peoples insensitivities.

If you can't handle it, there's always the freedom to leave.

The modern world has become one where people demand that the world should change instead of accepting and striving to create a place for themselves in the world.
Love it, love everything about it.
__________________
Game over, man. Game over.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bleeding hollow clan, buttery popcorn stand, dorito pope, feminism, game design, gameplay, gamers are winning, men are evil, patreon, women

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.