The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

I guess it was just an accident that you missed the second half of that quote:
"See, here is the real twist, were I a lesbian, my morning routine would be deemed as "IMPRESSIVE", "OUTSTANDING", "GRANDIOSE", or any other adjective truly devoid of meaning when it comes to modern gaming."
No, he's not politicizing this or anything...

Well, for many people (certainly including most professional reviewers and myself), cost wasn't really a factor at all. We got to enjoy it on its merits independently of its SRP. It wasn't hard for them to see the positive, it wasn't hard for me... Maybe the secret is to either get the game for nearly nothing or to play it without the purpose of looking for something to shit on... who knows.

Palum: "If you can withdraw consent in the middle of (regular) sex you are basically declaring someone a rapist ex post facto. The carnal knowledge has already occurred."

Lolwut.



Excidium: "Take the time to read the complaint. Cunt deserves jail time for this shit."

You know that's a claim against the university, right? Sulkowicz isn't being charged with anything.



Wizardhawk: "I'm no lawyer but I don't see any way possible that this isn't a slam dunk case."

It actually does seem like a pretty solid case.

Thanks for the "feels" update, Chan.

Palum: "I just... there's so much absurdity in any practical application of this 'at will consent'."

What the fuck planet do you live on?


Cad: "Whats stupid is that if she decides later that she didn't like it or regrets it, it becomes post-hoc rape. Which is obviously BS."

Indeed it is. It's also BS to just assume that's what happened in any given case without evidence to support it.

Palum: "Right I totally agree with that sentiment - except when it's that easy to gain 'victim' status it's going to be rampantly abused. I mean literally, go on normal date, start fooling around, mid-sex claim "I don't want to do this anymore!" and just keep banging dudes until one doesn't stop then immediately report it to the police. Instead street justice warrior social cred!"

Sweet Jesus. Are you offended by forks, too? You know, since a crazy woman could plunge one into her eyeball and blame it on an innocent man? What about pencils? A crazy woman could fake her own kidnapping and write a ransom note with one, right? (Plus, she could plunge it into her eyeball and blame it on an innocent man.)

I don't know how detached from reality someone has to be to believe the shit you splurted, but it certainly helps explain why so many people are quick to jump to the "crazy bitch must be making false rape accusations" conclusion every time she's not bleeding from her asshole with two black eyes and 3+ stab wounds while making the accusation. What the actual fuck, man.

Siddar: "This is another reason why people who say ignore the blue hairs are wrong. If you ignore them they will just wait a few months until people forget the stupid shit they have said and then try and worm there way back with a new revised brand of crazy."

...And?

Quaid: "Only a fool would advocate allowing the type of non-discourse radical 'progressives' are advocating to continue unchallenged.

Using claims of racism, sexism, homophobia etc to silence potential debate isn't in the spirit of the political environment of a democratic society. Winning a debate by not allowing it to happen is not a valid tactic outside of extremist circles. This emerging ideaology of deeming concepts 'unthinkable and undebateable' should be challenged at absolutely every turn. It's already gotten to the point where we are starting to see real world legal and economic consequences, and ignoring it won't help matters."

Only a fool would believe he can, or even should, "challenge" every stupid thing that anybody says.

Couple of inquiries:

Who's winning debates by not allowing them to happen? What are these debates?
How do you suggest we "challenge" the controversial ideology you speak of?
What are some of the real world consequences you mention? Have they done harm? How could they have been stopped?

All I'm seeing is a bunch of angry rhetoric.

Astral Projection: "Here's analysis by someone I assume is one of Emma's supporters."

Excellent analysis, thank you for sharing it.



Bisi: "SJW feels at work, ladies and gents"

Ummm.... You do understand that art IS about "feels", right?

Some highlights from the analysis of the Sulkowicz piece:

"Sulkowicz is challenging the viewer/reader to understand not the difference between an actual rape that happened to her and a simulated rape in the video, but to understand the difference between their own definition of rape, how they?ve applied it to her, and what rape actually is."

"It?s not about rape, or Sulkowicz?s rape, although it?s made clear in the comments portion that many viewers are trying to force an interpretation that Sulkowicz is using her (they believe actually nonexistent) trauma to make a name for herself (note the word ?force? there, and you?ll see why Sulkowicz says that they are participating in her rape)."

"Sulkowicz is likewise providing the public with a sensational viewing object ? the video ? and inviting us to react to it, and how we react to it will reveal who we are and what we value to the public and, hopefully, to ourselves."

"Sulkowicz is giving the commenters who view the video as pornography or who view the video in order to bolster their presumptive hatred of Sulkowicz the rope with which to hang themselves. She is letting them reveal themselves to be hateful of rape victims, to be willing to impose their own subjective definition of rape on a person they don?t know (remember the question: ?How well do you know me? Have we ever met??) in order to disparage her."


Good stuff.

Quaid: "1. There are numerous debates that are ongoing where detractors of the progressive left are deemed 'hate groups' for opposing them, or even daring to seek further data for a more complete picture. The debates surrounding the effectiveness of SRS and the campus rape epidemic are two cases among many."

Well, yeah, I've seen plenty of knee-jerk "hate group!" reactions tossed around, but as far as I've seen that hasn't won any debates. If anything, those kinds of reactions have encouraged the opposition to become more vocal and active, which in turn has ensured that much attention is given to flash-in-the-pan stupidity and not to actual issues worthy of discussing. Not sure what you're trying to say here.


Quaid: "2. You challenge these people by cohesive social opposition. See: #GamerGate"

GamerGate is about ethics in video game journalism. For video game journalism to be in any way profitable (ie: to survive), it has to accommodate and appeal to gamers. GamerGate showed journalists that they had to step up their game if they wanted to not be targeted by boycotts and anger-fueled hate campaigns, so they responded accordingly. They had no choice! Unfortunately, when it comes to SJWs, the same approach doesn't seem to work. See, this "cohesive social opposition" doesn't result in a loss of essential profit for SJWs. On the contrary, the more vocal people are about being anti-SJW, the more attention, power, influence and PROFIT SJWs get. Have we not realized that yet? As many times as the Streisand Effect has been mentioned here, can we not recognize when we are Streisand?



Quaid: "3. Real world consequences can already be seen beginning to emerge. See the POTUS stating in two consecutive State of the Union Adresses that there exists a (fictitious and widely debunked) gender wage gap, and urging congress to expand government to deal with the problem. This is one of the most high profile among many."

Alright, sounds like you're on to something. So what actions has the POTUS taken to fix this problem he addressed? I see you mentioned he's been "urging congress"... to do what? Has anything happened? Are women suddenly unfairly (and based on false pretenses) being paid more than men? If that's your highest profile case, I still fail to see where the real-world negative consequences of SJWism are.

Mist: "Being a white knight to get laid is understandable from the behaviorist perspective, but to assuage some made up feeling of guilt it is not."

Being a white knight to get laid WOULD be understandable if it actually got anybody laid. Turns out "white knight" is just a lazy label assigned so that internet "alphas" can easily dismiss opinions they don't want to/can't address.


Seb: "Is it a coincidence that many SJWs such Itzena and Tanoomba are essentially obsessed with a culture which has largely abandoned masculinity?"

What makes you think I'm an SJW? I have always been a moderate, and my track record proves that.
You, on the other hand, are an ideological extremist, also proven by your track record.