Search results

OK, you're finally getting close to addressing things she's actually said. I will assume you're referring to these three tweets: First of all, you understand that "toxic masculinity" does NOT mean that masculinity in and of itself is toxic, right? I feel this needs to be clarified because...

No, it isn't. You saying it is doesn't make it so. You're not making a scientific claim. You're making a feels-based claim and trying to use the word "science" as a shield. The fact that you're using the word "science" (not even any scientific principles or anything, just the word "science") to...

I'm not saying she's making biology-based arguments, I'm saying the arguments she's making aren't necessarily dependent on a knowledge of biology. Who are you to decide the only framework from which certain topics must be discussed? Do you know when biology would be relevant to something Sark...

Started the inverted castle today. Feels good.

Are the only differences between men and women biological? Sarkeesian isn't a biologist and never pretended to be one. That doesn't automatically invalidate everything she says, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean she's dangerous or harmful. Also, who are you to say she ignores science? You're using...

Of course. Wait, did you find a quote of Sarkeesian claiming otherwise?

What? Are you willing to consider context? You claim you are but it seems to me your idea of "context" is "stuff other people have said that allows me to justify ridiculous hyperbole". Quote him.

Illogical nonsense isn't inherently harmful. Heck, can you find me something Sark said that you consider "illogical nonsense"? I didn't ignore anything. He was talking about how post-modernism can be used to ignore facts (something you have PROVABLY done on multiple occasions, lest you forget)...

Feminism, even third-wave feminism, even intersectional third-wave feminism, isn't inherently harmful. You also haven't yet shown how Sark is post-modernist (it's certainly not a given). Heck, after all these posts you still can't seem to differentiate between something being harmful and...

This is wrong. I insisted nothing of the sort. YOU are the one making the claim. YOU are the one failing to back it up. What is Sarkeesian's "revolutionary ideology"? have you got a quote where she's preaching it to the masses?

"She's a cross-dimensional pre-rational pseudo-psycho-political feminist! She's hurting the world!" What do you think being offended IS, man?

OF COURSE it's about feelings. OF COURSE. A pop culture critic talked smack about a hobby you enjoy, you and your ilk got offended, decided to play the victim and, in your attempts to overthrow her, made her more powerful than ever. Now that you've given her this power, you're claiming that...

Well, that's what your feels tell you, anyway. After all, you wouldn't be so offended if it weren't truly harmful, right? Think about the trolls' burner accounts, man!

I've never said nor implied this. Except YOU, right? When YOU'RE offended, it's because people are causing REAL HARM and making the world a WORSE PLACE by expressing their points of view, right? "Good enough for thee, but not for me."

She was invited to speak there, right? As someone who was excessively targeted for online harassment, her perspective was deemed valuable. How does that mean she's claiming moral authority? Again (again, again, again), feel free to use her actual words at any point in time instead of posting a...

...And? Do you have a point to go along with that picture?

How does Sarkeesian claim to be a moral authority? She did claim to be an "expert" on how women are portrayed in video games (for whatever that's worth), but that has nothing to do with moral authority. If there are other claims she has made as to her authority, moral or otherwise, feel free to...

Sarkeesian doesn't claim to be a moral authority either, and she certainly doesn't use her authority to control other people, unless you've got evidence that shows otherwise (protip: You don't). She's not trying to oppress anyone, unless you've got evidence that shows otherwise (you don't). She...

It's created by robots?

How are YOU measuring harm? I think it's a fair question. "Noam Chomsky used this keyword!" is not a unit of measurement, after all.

So, "measurable harm" is not a factor, you're saying. Actual proof of people's lives being made worse is worth nothing, but your personal belief that someone has earned a bunch of labels you've arbitrarily decided are universally harmful, that's what's important. And I'm not saying we need to...

I don't know if it's because of the initial stat boost or not, but most of the bosses I've beat have not put up much of a fight, compared to what I remember. Also, like an idiot I went and spent money on a bunch of spells, having forgotten that you can access them just by doing the proper...

Just like I do every time I play this, I accidentally beat the game when I just meant to access more of the map. I guess it's worth seeing the alternate ending, though. Feel kinda bad for Richter. If anybody makes the same mistake I did and forgets about the metal grate under the library, you...

Rick and Morty promotes illogical nonscience. Clever and fun illogical nonscience, but illogical nonscience nonetheless. And, if we're going to judge by actual human suffering, the great szechuan revolt made several people's days objectively and measurably worse. We've got the videos and...

So do you. Are you causing harm to society?

No, they didn't. If I'm wrong, quote them. Irrelevant, but they have been targeted for excessive harassment online (FAR more than the average person) and know more than a little about internet assholes and how they operate. Do you intend to show how they cause harm? In fact, I do know what she...

Neither of them (Chomsky nor Paglia) said that that frame of mind was inherently harmful. That's besides the fact that you have not shown that Sarkeesian promotes third-wave feminism. So? What harm was caused? Again (again, again, again), censorship isn't inherently harmful. I'm not losing any...

Your EXACT QUOTE: Once again, you're shifting your goal posts.

But you haven't shown that what Sarkeesian believes is harmful. You haven't even addressed what she believes. All you've said is that because she's a feminist, then by default she's anti-biology and therefore causing harm to society. You're WRONG that being a feminist makes one anti-biology...

I didn't.

What are you even talking about? OF COURSE Sarkeesian is a feminist. It's her most outspoken trait. It's the name of her organization! You're really not helping prove that you can be rational with comments like these. According to what? YOU? You haven't expressed a single issue with anything...

No, he wasn't. In fact, he didn't even mention how being post-modernist could cause real-world harm. He mentioned that, as an argumentative tool, it could be used to attempt to deny what we have come to accept as objective truths. Certainly, that has the potential for harm. That DOES NOT MEAN...

Saw this yesterday and really enjoyed it. I loved the fact that the central conflict of the movie was whether or not Wakanda had any responsibility to use their resources to help others, and that they didn't pretend like it was an easy or obvious choice. The fact that T'Challa's father's...

What? I didn't deny they exist. I provided definitions for every single one, FFS. Clearly I am capable of acknowledging them. What I denied was that these labels describe beliefs that are inherently harmful. You are under the false assumption that labels = arguments. They don't. Right. Again, I...

In what world do you live in where this is an explanation of ANYTHING? By the way, if all you're going to do is throw buzz words at me, then you sure as hell had better not start accusing ME of resorting to semantics arguments. You literally threw a pile of words at me that didn't even form a...

"That's our story, and we're sticking to it!"

Yeah, I've heard this before. And yet, if I ask you to name ONE SINGLE FACT I've missed you won't be able to do it, because it's a lie and all you're apparently capable of is spouting hollow rhetoric and not backing up a single thing you say. Make a statement, BACK IT UP. That's the definition...

I don't absorb bullshit, I step around it.