tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post6628045308452506448..comments2023-05-14T03:03:09.451-05:00Comments on Female Impersonator: Grand Theft Auto 4 wants you to kill hookers to get your money backAmeliahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-8645928038866918132008-05-02T12:20:00.000-05:002008-05-02T12:20:00.000-05:00For the record:Grand Theft Auto III:Catalina: Not...For the record:<BR/><BR/>Grand Theft Auto III:<BR/><BR/>Catalina: Notorious bank robber, not sex object, not prostitute.<BR/><BR/>Maria: Girlfriend/wife of head of Leone crime family, not used as sex object or prostitute.<BR/><BR/>Asuka: Co-leader of local branch of Yakuza, not sex object or prostitute.<BR/><BR/>Grand Theft Auto San Andreas:<BR/><BR/>Kendl: Sister of main character, portrayed as intelligent, pragmatic, entrepreneurial, creative, and having qualities of leadership.<BR/><BR/>And she's not even a main character.<BR/><BR/>In fact, the only sex objects/prostitutes in these games, are the hookers.<BR/><BR/>Any female that is a front line character is not.<BR/><BR/>So, there's your verification and proof. What do I win?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-50150749557628374432008-05-01T08:47:00.000-05:002008-05-01T08:47:00.000-05:00"Your response of "Nah" to Kate's suggestion that ..."Your response of "Nah" to Kate's suggestion that you read the other blogs that we linked to means you are unwilling to acknowledge that some people do not fit your neat little mold."<BR/><BR/>No, my response of "Nah", meant I wasn't just relying on some "old media stereotype", and was in fact, using current examples.<BR/><BR/>"And just because a few women are like this doesn't make it a sound argument against feminists in general."<BR/><BR/>It's more than a few.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-3511532649681182202008-05-01T06:21:00.000-05:002008-05-01T06:21:00.000-05:00Anonymous, you make me sad.Your response of "Nah" ...Anonymous, you make me sad.<BR/><BR/>Your response of "Nah" to Kate's suggestion that you read the other blogs that we linked to means you are unwilling to acknowledge that some people do not fit your neat little mold.<BR/><BR/>"Even still, many of those that don't hate men, still consider us less important than women, which to me, is just as bad."<BR/><BR/>Stereotype. <BR/><BR/>And just because a few women are like this doesn't make it a sound argument against feminists in general. I also feel that you are probably just...wrong in a lot of cases.<BR/><BR/>Since you seem to be able to use anything but them, even though we've given you plenty of opportunity to do so, this conversation is over.<BR/><BR/>Good bye.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-15175732258381539802008-05-01T06:20:00.000-05:002008-05-01T06:20:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-10789426914755544202008-05-01T03:39:00.000-05:002008-05-01T03:39:00.000-05:00"You are relying on old stereotypes perpetuated by..."You are relying on old stereotypes perpetuated by the media, and truly grounded in fact. Just click on the links on the side of the blog. Those are vocal feminists, and not one of them is a man-hater."<BR/><BR/>Nah. That very example was quoted directly from a current feminist blog.<BR/><BR/>The owner of which wishes for heterosexual sex to be criminalized for all males that engage in it.<BR/><BR/>Not some "old media stereotype".<BR/><BR/>I never base things on hearsay. If I've seen it personally, I call it an example.<BR/><BR/>Even still, many of those that don't hate men, still consider us less important than women, which to me, is just as bad.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-82798113017550171672008-05-01T00:14:00.000-05:002008-05-01T00:14:00.000-05:00***I meant NOT truly grounded in fact.Sorry.***I meant NOT truly grounded in fact.<BR/><BR/>Sorry.Katehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00139058825727884888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-69043420928685526752008-04-30T23:56:00.000-05:002008-04-30T23:56:00.000-05:00"Anyone who is a member of any group or movement h..."Anyone who is a member of any group or movement has to deal with this. Frankly, if your loudest members are the ones that hate men, and want to criminalize heterosexual sex (for males), you're going to have to deal with that. It's also not anyone else's problem but your own, if such things attach themselves to you"<BR/><BR/>Frankly, I don't think the most vocal members of the feminist movement are man-haters. In fact, I've never met one. You are relying on old stereotypes perpetuated by the media, and truly grounded in fact. Just click on the links on the side of the blog. Those are vocal feminists, and not one of them is a man-hater.Katehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00139058825727884888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-41599286919604646812008-04-30T22:02:00.000-05:002008-04-30T22:02:00.000-05:00I told him he needs to be able to answer a questio...<I>I told him he needs to be able to answer a question, not bounce the question elsewhere.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Just like he requested you back up your claims here: <I>And I'm still waiting on those examples of any women in the GTA games that aren't sex objects.<BR/><BR/>By identifying yourself with the movement, you invite certain descriptions and associations.<BR/><BR/>Anyone who is a member of any group or movement has to deal with this. Frankly, if your loudest members are the ones that hate men, and want to criminalize heterosexual sex (for males), you're going to have to deal with that. It's also not anyone else's problem but your own, if such things attach themselves to you.</I><BR/><BR/>That's precisely why I call myself a feminist - to give an example that not all feminists are raging man-haters who blame men for everything. Sure, there are problems with it, but I am right here as a counter example. I don't hate men, I don't blame men for everything, I try to live my life as equally as possible, I open doors for everyone, regardless of gender. <BR/><BR/>That being said, I'm with Amelia.lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285797515594923013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-55550087936004269682008-04-30T20:33:00.000-05:002008-04-30T20:33:00.000-05:00I would like to re-phrase that clearly do not inco...I would like to re-phrase <I>that clearly do not incorporate the writers on this blog</I> to read as: that clearly does not always incorporate the writers on this blog, as <B>I am perfectly willing</B> to admit that sometimes I (and others) have spoken in generalizations, but I am ready to explain that that is not the correct way to argue.<BR/><BR/>I think there is a difference there, and unless you are willing to give a little and admit your mistakes, I will no longer engage in this...discussion...with you.<BR/><BR/>Thank you, Anonymous.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-40575507713187666342008-04-30T19:52:00.000-05:002008-04-30T19:52:00.000-05:00You still fail to convince me of any of your argum...You still fail to convince me of any of your arguments against feminism, because a number of feminists on this blog fail to fit in your generalization.<BR/><BR/>Being "someone living in a country what grants him freedom of speech" does not make it intelligent to argue on the premise of generalizations that clearly do not incorporate the writers on this blog.<BR/><BR/><I>By identifying yourself with the movement, you invite certain descriptions and associations.</I><BR/><BR/>That is true, but <B>only</B> so when people (dare I say yourself included?) refuse to think outside of stereotypes/generalizations, even when confronted with examples that prove those things incorrect.<BR/><BR/>I get the feeling that you feel threatened by feminism. Otherwise you might be more receptive to realizing that you are not always correct when you say things such as "feminists hate men" and the like.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-81053257608257870272008-04-30T19:41:00.000-05:002008-04-30T19:41:00.000-05:00"As the founder of this blog, and a feminist with ..."As the founder of this blog, and a feminist with a chivalrous boyfriend, I would like to say that your generalizations are not welcome here, Anonymous. I don't care what other blogs have led you to believe. This blog promotes no such idea. The end. You cannot argue that."<BR/><BR/>As someone living in a country what grants him freedom of speech, I can argue whatever I damn well please, when it comes right down to it.<BR/><BR/>Feminists make gross generalizations every day. I've even seen them here. You get what you give, one might say.<BR/><BR/>I still don't see it as a generalization to say something is "not entirely a myth", based on seeing actual fact.<BR/><BR/>By identifying yourself with the movement, you invite certain descriptions and associations.<BR/><BR/>Anyone who is a member of any group or movement has to deal with this. Frankly, if your loudest members are the ones that hate men, and want to criminalize heterosexual sex (for males), you're going to have to deal with that. It's also not anyone else's problem but your own, if such things attach themselves to you.<BR/><BR/>"Also, I think that chivalry needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. Some people can be considered chivalrous when they treat all people the same - holding doors for men, women, and children."<BR/><BR/>Mine is much more sensible.<BR/><BR/>You have arms. You can open your own damned doors, and pay for your own dinner, and should you want a shiny engagement ring, well, buy it yourself.<BR/><BR/>That's my logic. Though the last part about the ring is mostly snark, as I'd never be in that sort of situation in the first place, I still felt like throwing it in.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-78244928816273755762008-04-30T19:12:00.000-05:002008-04-30T19:12:00.000-05:00Also, I think that chivalry needs to be addressed ...Also, I think that chivalry needs to be addressed on a case by case basis. Some people can be considered chivalrous when they treat all people the same - holding doors for men, women, and children.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-72508864494872037122008-04-30T19:11:00.000-05:002008-04-30T19:11:00.000-05:00It's also not entirely a "myth". I've read more th...<I>It's also not entirely a "myth". I've read more than my fair share of feminist blogs, and trust me, the hate is virulent and obvious. Such as the mess splattered onto the internet by one 'Twisty Faster'.</I><BR/><BR/>As the founder of this blog, and a feminist with a chivalrous boyfriend, I would like to say that your generalizations are not welcome here, Anonymous. I don't care what other blogs have led you to believe. This blog promotes no such idea. The end. You cannot argue that.Ameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884754298018500343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-63172882047430444622008-04-30T18:31:00.000-05:002008-04-30T18:31:00.000-05:00"Uh, most blogs I read exclusively refer to "chiva..."Uh, most blogs I read exclusively refer to "chivalrous" men as sexist, and chivalry as sexism. Also, just like feminists can single out anyone who disagrees and call them a hater of women, so too, can I say the average feminist that does the same could indeed be a hater of men."<BR/><BR/>Chivalry falls under the category of something called benevolent sexism, meaning that it is not a directly negative influence, but it still contributes to the overall notion that women are more fragile and less capable than men. If you had looked around at that site I posted, you would know that already.<BR/><BR/>You also might have noticed that the purpose of Feminism 101 is to educate people as to the true ideologies behind the movement so they don't derail discussions by saying things like "I was under the impression feminists hated men that held the door for them, etcetera."<BR/><BR/>It is true that some feminists are more extreme than others. But that is true of absolutely any socio-political movement. The vast majority of women interested in this subject are rational, intelligent individuals who are forced to repeatedly defend themselves against the "man-hater" argument (and plenty of others) precisely because people don't do their homework before getting involved in the discourse.<BR/><BR/>And I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by telling me the word "heteronormative" is a political statement. It seems it's the perfect sort of word for this discussion, then, because last time I checked, gender and sexuality issues are, in fact, political in nature. They have to be, or no change would come of the ideas exchanged within them.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03293899765809639283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-16481576718614503742008-04-30T18:12:00.000-05:002008-04-30T18:12:00.000-05:00"He's not asking for answers; he's asking for exam..."He's not asking for answers; he's asking for examples. If you can't give them or cite your sources or back up your claims, I don't feel like anyone should listen to you. If you want to make a point - back it up. You shouldn't have any problem doing this if your arguments are as solid as you think (and talk like) they are."<BR/><BR/>What??<BR/><BR/>I asked a question, he answered by ordering me to read some external link.<BR/><BR/>I told him he needs to be able to answer a question, not bounce the question elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>"Your mistake was suggesting that feminists hate "chivalrous" men. The notion that feminists hate men is one of the oldest myths about the movement, perpetuated mostly in ignorance, but inadvertently supporting the patriarchal, heteronormative society in which we live."<BR/><BR/>Uh, most blogs I read exclusively refer to "chivalrous" men as sexist, and chivalry as sexism. Also, just like feminists can single out anyone who disagrees and call them a hater of women, so too, can I say the average feminist that does the same could indeed be a hater of men.<BR/><BR/>It's also not entirely a "myth". I've read more than my fair share of feminist blogs, and trust me, the hate is virulent and obvious. Such as the mess splattered onto the internet by one 'Twisty Faster'. <BR/><BR/>Again, neologisms ruin your argument and make you look like you're just trying to make some political statement.<BR/><BR/>"But before you seemed so wedded to the concept that the exception proves the rule: "But you see, even if they only fail to drop cash once, that's still proving my point.""<BR/><BR/>False analogy. Saying that proves that they aren't simply returning the money spent to you. So does the fact that it might cost you $100, and they drop, say, $15.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-62829004489991210132008-04-30T17:26:00.000-05:002008-04-30T17:26:00.000-05:00"Personal anecdotes are irrelevant"But before you ..."Personal anecdotes are irrelevant"<BR/><BR/>But before you seemed so wedded to the concept that the exception proves the rule: "But you see, even if they only fail to drop cash once, that's still proving my point."<BR/><BR/>So, if only one criminal fails to adhere to your assertion of their presumed actions, then your entire point is wrong.OutcrazyOpheliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01962033787590226582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-18420424681473676692008-04-30T16:05:00.000-05:002008-04-30T16:05:00.000-05:00The word "heteronormative" refers to the ways in w...The word "heteronormative" refers to the ways in which society expects and in many cases coerces individuals to comply with a set of behaviors that is exclusively heterosexual and suits the identity of the majority at the expense of the minority.<BR/><BR/>If you think that concept and the recognition of it has no value, I'm curious as to why you even read this blog.<BR/><BR/>I do not oppose the game. I do not promote removal or censorship of it. I do, however, promote acknowledgment of the fact that it contains sexist themes. There is a difference.<BR/><BR/>And the Feminism 101 site was created as a resource to provide information for those who, like yourself, are not fully informed about feminism. Your mistake was suggesting that feminists hate "chivalrous" men. The notion that feminists hate men is one of the oldest myths about the movement, perpetuated mostly in ignorance, but inadvertently supporting the patriarchal, heteronormative society in which we live.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03293899765809639283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-27900190788206810942008-04-30T15:59:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:59:00.000-05:00there's not one iota of proof that movies/video ga...<I>there's not one iota of proof that movies/video games/comics/music/etcetera cause violence, or even make the person more likely to ignore it, or become desensitized to it.</I><BR/><BR/>I wouldn't say that increased media violence causes violence, but definitely desensitizes people to it. In Pamela Paul's Pornified, she cites a study in which people who have massive exposure to porn are more likely to be desensitized to porn and want to watch more hardcore porn. She interviewed people who this happened with, as well. Now I don't agree with all of her conclusions in her book, but I think the studies she cites and the examples she gives offer a good template for what might/is happening with violence. <BR/><BR/><I>Frankly, if you can't come up with your own answers, and need someone else to give them, I have no time for you.</I><BR/><BR/>He's not asking for answers; he's asking for examples. If you can't give them or cite your sources or back up your claims, I don't feel like anyone should listen to you. If you want to make a point - back it up. You shouldn't have any problem doing this if your arguments are as solid as you think (and talk like) they are.lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285797515594923013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-25728898199372565762008-04-30T15:43:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:43:00.000-05:00"So we should just stop adding to the language, re..."So we should just stop adding to the language, regardless of the fact that circumstances continue to change and require new and different definitions or descriptions?"<BR/><BR/>There's a difference between "adding to the language", and "making a political statement". You can guess which column most feminist/PC neologisms fall under.<BR/><BR/>"Also, heteronormative has a much more practical and academic origin than any of the other examples you supplied."<BR/><BR/>Don't care. Still a neologism of no value.<BR/><BR/>"So one cannot be liberal and oppose the glorification of rampant crime, drug use, prostitution and misogyny? Guess I'm a raging conservative, then."<BR/><BR/>If you oppose the game, and want it pulled, or want people to stop playing it, or want them to stop making it, then yes, you're a conservative, as you oppose the right to free speech.<BR/><BR/>"Check out the following website before you say anything like this again."<BR/><BR/>Check out the following website before you think you can tell me what to do again.<BR/><BR/>http://www.dont-tell-me-what-to-do.com<BR/><BR/>Frankly, if you can't come up with your own answers, and need someone else to give them, I have no time for you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-90115546864743222032008-04-30T15:39:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:39:00.000-05:00"Because by using "criminal" to describe a person,..."Because by using "criminal" to describe a person, that's all they are. Their identity is of a criminal, as opposed to someone who has a criminal record."<BR/><BR/>If it walks like a duck...<BR/><BR/>Commit a crime, you're a criminal. Commit a felony, you're a felon. Murder someone, you're a murderer.<BR/><BR/>Feminists take no qualms with calling someone who has raped once, a rapist, so, call a spade a spade in all situations.<BR/><BR/>"It has the potential to desensitize someone to violence. Not that that makes someone a bad person either, but as our culture becomes increasingly saturated with violence, it can lead to having minor violence be ignored and major violence seen as minor violence."<BR/><BR/>Except like most "blame the media, not the parents raising the child" arguments, there's not one iota of proof that movies/video games/comics/music/etcetera cause violence, or even make the person more likely to ignore it, or become desensitized to it.<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry, I just don't buy it. At all. I've been playing video games, including horribly violent ones, watching violent movies, and more, for pretty much my entire life.<BR/><BR/>I also sing to my cats. Point is, a well-raised, mentally healthy and well adjusted person will be completely unaffected by seeing these games. Period. Anyone that would be set off by them, was already heading to a violent outburst, and the game didn't trigger it, it just happened to exist coincidentally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-39220060042955579652008-04-30T15:37:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:37:00.000-05:00"I find they [neologisms] impair an argument, not ..."I find they [neologisms] impair an argument, not strengthen it."<BR/><BR/>So we should just stop adding to the language, regardless of the fact that circumstances continue to change and require new and different definitions or descriptions?<BR/><BR/>Also, heteronormative has a much more practical and academic origin than any of the other examples you supplied.<BR/><BR/>"I think you're in the wrong place. There are plenty of conservative republican blogs that would gladly welcome someone with an opinion like that."<BR/><BR/>So one cannot be liberal and oppose the glorification of rampant crime, drug use, prostitution and misogyny? Guess I'm a raging conservative, then.<BR/><BR/>And I'm still waiting on those examples of any women in the GTA games that aren't sex objects.<BR/><BR/>"To add:<BR/><BR/>"I dated someone with a criminal record who, in fact, did all of those things. "<BR/><BR/>I was under the impression feminists hated men that held the door for them, etcetera.<BR/><BR/>I mean, if we're all equal, why is someone holding the door for you?"<BR/><BR/>Check out the following website before you say anything like this again.<BR/><BR/>http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/purpose/faq-i-asked-some-feminists-a-question-and-instead-of-answering-they-sent-me-here-why/Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03293899765809639283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-4563836634751034662008-04-30T15:21:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:21:00.000-05:00I mean, if we're all equal, why is someone holding...<I>I mean, if we're all equal, why is someone holding the door for you?</I><BR/><BR/>Because I held the door open for him.<BR/><BR/><I>Having a record and BEING a criminal are two different things, especially when referring to a person attempting to become a prominent member of a criminal underworld through acts of murder, bribery and worse.</I><BR/><BR/>Before I posted my comment, I actually debated using "criminal" but finally went with "had a criminal record." Want to know why? Because by using "criminal" to describe a person, that's all they are. Their identity is of a criminal, as opposed to someone who has a criminal record. It opens the person up to be more than just a "criminal." It's a similar argument to saying "disabled person" or "a person with disabilities."<BR/><BR/>And by the way, the person I dated with a criminal record had spent multiple years in jail so it wasn't something like peeing in an alley. That's all I'm going to say.<BR/><BR/><I>Just because someone plays a violent video game, doesn't make them a bad person.</I><BR/><BR/>It has the potential to desensitize someone to violence. Not that that makes someone a bad person either, but as our culture becomes increasingly saturated with violence, it can lead to having minor violence be ignored and major violence seen as minor violence.lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285797515594923013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-66980929624525971722008-04-30T15:07:00.000-05:002008-04-30T15:07:00.000-05:00"The fact that this series is so popular says a lo..."The fact that this series is so popular says a lot about American society in general, and none of it is good."<BR/><BR/>I think you're in the wrong place. There are plenty of conservative republican blogs that would gladly welcome someone with an opinion like that.<BR/><BR/>Enjoying violent media =/= being violent. <BR/><BR/>Humanity enjoys violence. Always has, always will. From feeding people to the lions in Rome, to boxing and war movies in more modern times. <BR/><BR/>Just because someone plays a violent video game, doesn't make them a bad person.<BR/><BR/>Your problem is that they're doing something you don't approve of, and that bothers you, that your advice/opinion is being ignored. That's what I think it really comes down to. You don't want to play, you don't think people should play it, and you're bothered because they do even though you wish they wouldn't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-52796439631392443342008-04-30T14:37:00.000-05:002008-04-30T14:37:00.000-05:00I'm going to go with Lindsay's last comment and sa...I'm going to go with Lindsay's last comment and say that the developers only envisioned misanthropic straight white males as their target audience. What with all the over-sexualization of women, racial slurs, and gameplay that does not even attempt to apologize for violence with some higher purpose.<BR/><BR/>The fact that this series is so popular says a lot about American society in general, and none of it is good.Jennhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05333226493312516551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6730657139931062421.post-89492008828445548892008-04-30T14:35:00.001-05:002008-04-30T14:35:00.001-05:00To add:"I dated someone with a criminal record who...To add:<BR/><BR/>"I dated someone with a criminal record who, in fact, did all of those things. "<BR/><BR/>I was under the impression feminists hated men that held the door for them, etcetera.<BR/><BR/>I mean, if we're all equal, why is someone holding the door for you?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com