Psyker Landshark said
dat Vivian tho
Just displaying my allegiance, Psy.
Psyker Landshark said
dat Vivian tho
Magic Magnum said
Gaming even if it's becoming more accepted, is still the main hobby that keeps people from going outside. It's still the hobby where on average there are less IRL social interactions. Both of which btw are 100% fine, I do not mean to imply for a second that being a gamer is somehow wrong or unhealthy and needs to chance. Hell a better way to word it may simply be "Gamer's are the most likely to be Introverts".What do Extroverts constantly do in reaction to Introverts? Not connect or relate as well, people who feel a massive need to get outside, interact with human beings etc. Setting up Introvert's as something a bit alien, and once seen as something outside/different it becomes easier for Introverts to be looked down upon. This is easily seen in examples such as:-In School's it's always the Extroverted Popular kids who more people like. That School Staff and Majority of Teachers treat favorably and look the other way for most often.-Extrovert's always being deemed as the "Developmentally Healthy" individual/mindset, and the Introvert being painted as "Developmentally flawed or lacking".And once you society as degraded them in such a way, it becomes easily to make them the scapegoat. Make them the sub-group to be hated upon, controlling that hatred to fuel another,selfish agendaIt's this, in Combination with "New Things scare society" is what I believe has allowed the 'Gamers are Violent/Entitled/Sexist' claims to stay alive for so long. Hell most of the claims about violence, entitlement or being sexist can be more easily (and accurately) made in regards to something such as sports. But it never happens, cause that isn't a group of people that society has decided it can look down on, but rather something they openly accept and identify with.
So Boerd said
Judging from my two minutes of research, which was all I could spare on it, I have reached several conclusions, of which all but the last are probably wrong/misguided.1. The allegation that supporters just want to sleep with her is untrue (hopefully). I have mistaken better looking women for men in my peripheral vision. She's less "Marilyn Monroe" and more "Marilyn Manson".2. Feminists rallying to her is stupid.3. This is extraordinarily trivial. It is almost noteworthy how trivial this is, to be getting so much attention.
HeySeuss said
Her basement dweller boyfriend needs to let go...or get a real doll, name it Zoe and work out the angst there. Something like that. What a putz. And oh Internet, you're putzes too for going along with one kiddult's thwarted relationship rage.edit: And before anyone accuses me thus, no I don't want to sleep with the woman. Never even knew who the hell she was until I did about a half hour's worth of background reading on the whole dust-up. Not my type. But yeah, it's rather fucked up to assume that someone defending her must want to stick it in.
data549 said
Ah, Phil Fish. That is a name I haven't heard in a long time. From what I've read, his role in this mess just seems to be one big "LOOK AT ME, I'M IMPORTANT".
Robeatics said
I mean, I know several SJWs who are actually pretty cool beyond being uptight about a few things. Their big focus is on drawing attention to good charities and bad injustices, etc. Maybe I'm just seeing the good side most of the time?
Robeatics said
Damn, that seems like the exact opposite of what SJWs would want.
Dinh AaronMk said
God dammit.Well /pol/ and /v/. What do now...
Voltaire said
I don't get it. Was the charity shut down by SJWs who were running the charity? Or are you saying SJWs pressured the charity into being shut down?