This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Ksero
An article on females being verbally abused while gaming.
www.theage.com.au/digital-life/games/its-a-mans-virtual-world-20120627-211du.html/
Personally I think this article is ridiculous, not that females don't get abused while gaming online, but the people who do the abusing aren't only abusing females , the author also seems oblivious that you can block people in games, and they have no way of contacting you, that would stop all the "stalking" they talk about.
There's also the fact that women can trash talk back, and or beat them in game, that would be a pretty good comeback.
For the women that get picked on because they are bad players, they get the same kind of abuse that any other bad player would.
In fact, I see women get special treatment/extra help in games just because they are female. I have never once seen a man get help just because he was a guy.
(and before anyone goes out and says "you aren't a female gamer," one of my best friends is. She plays CoD, and is pretty decent at it, if someone throws an insult at her, she will throw one right back)
Post by
Nathanyal
That first line in the article can be directed at anyone. It just happens that it was a woman in this case.
And how can the other players know they're playing against a woman? Unless she speaks or says she is a girl in her gamertag, and even then the 12 year-olds that play sound like girls and I don't trust anyone that says they're a girl in their profile name, they can't really know she is a girl.
And you have the whole "This is the internet, I can say anything and not get in trouble for it" thing that is in most video games you play.
Post by
gamerunknown
Most people unfamiliar with our particular subsection of the internet probably aren't aware of the thriving racism and sexism.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Orranis
I don't think I've ever personally seen someone get abused, teased, or anything like that while gaming specifically and only for being a girl. The most I've seen was after a guildy quit raiding with us someone made a comment that they thought it was because she wasn't the only girl in the group anymore. I think you'll see that on things more like sub-sections of the internet we were talking about, and yes in gaming, but not overwhelmingly so.
Edit: I lied. I've seen plenty teasing about it, but only in a playful way.
Post by
gamerunknown
Romney invested in a medical waste company that among other things disposed of
aborted foetuses
from abortion clinics.
Post by
MyTie
Romney invested in a medical waste company that among other things disposed of
aborted foetuses
from abortion clinics.
No.
Bain Capitol invested in it in 1999, and Romney left in Feb 1999, and likely had nothing to do with the deal. He did own stock with the company, though.
You make it sound like the guy went out with a wad of cash and looked for a way to invest in foetus disposal. Let's try to represent the truth, shall we?
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Rand Paul (R-KY) has tried to introduce another personhood bill to define foetuses as people. That's all fine and dandy, it's his job, but the part about it that's newsworthy is the way he did it: he tried to add it as an amendment to a bill about flood insurance. Now, whether or not you agree with the concept, I'd hope everyone recognises how this is clearly an attempt to circumvent the democratic process and not only does it give him a chance to sneak it through under the radar but it would also mean having to sacrifice legitimate legislation in order to fight this one unrelated amendment.
Source
.
Yeah, I really see where you are coming from. I don't like the practice of tacking unrelated stuff onto legislation in the hope of passing a peripheral issue, or of killing an undesirable bill.
On the other hand, if I were working on a water insurance bill in Nazi Germany, I would probably amend it to stop killing Jews. I'd probably put that on every single piece of legislation I could, because that would be my priority to such an extent that I wouldn't be able to do anything with a government that promoted genocide until it stopped. You see where this is going?
Post by
gamerunknown
Not the first time he's pulled such a tactic
.
This Fortune article
addresses the earlier Mother Jones one. Fair and balanced.
Post by
Squishalot
Nothing on the
Higgs
yet?
Need to do a bit more looking around though - I read a BBC article before the announcement that suggested they'd only gotten 4 SDs of significance, and needed 5 before officially claiming it. Does anyone else know?
Post by
Nathanyal
Yeah, I read about the "God particle" several days ago.
Post by
Ksero
Remember watching how the LHC was built on disovery channel when i was about 12 years old, it's amazing to see how far they have come in 7 years.
The combined data from 2 separate experiments to get the 5 sigma result, so they were able to say they discovered a new particle.
Post by
MyTie
If news broke that
a nuclear weapon launched from Iran
had just detonated a US military base, how would you suggest the US react?
A) Do nothing, since we shouldn't have been over there anyway.
B) Do nothing, since they were just reacting to the oppression of their people by US imperialism.
C) Apologize to them, for offending them with our materialistic culture.
D) Send them money, in trade for not doing it again.
Post by
Adamsm
Depends on why it happened; if they were attacked first, can't blame them for retaliating now can you?
Post by
MyTie
Depends on why it happened; if they were attacked first, can't blame them for retaliating now can you?
If their nuclear weapons facility were the target of that "first strike", and they were warned that developing nuclear weapons would result in a first strike, then yes, I can blame them for retaliating.
Post by
Squishalot
If news broke that
a nuclear weapon launched from Iran
had just detonated a US military base, how would you suggest the US react?
A) Do nothing, since we shouldn't have been over there anyway.
B) Do nothing, since they were just reacting to the oppression of their people by US imperialism.
C) Apologize to them, for offending them with our materialistic culture.
D) Send them money, in trade for not doing it again.
Why isn't the US MO there?
E) Bomb the crap out of them, depose the leaders, install 'DemocracyTM' and move out before it's ready?
Post by
MyTie
If news broke that
a nuclear weapon launched from Iran
had just detonated a US military base, how would you suggest the US react?
A) Do nothing, since we shouldn't have been over there anyway.
B) Do nothing, since they were just reacting to the oppression of their people by US imperialism.
C) Apologize to them, for offending them with our materialistic culture.
D) Send them money, in trade for not doing it again.
Why isn't the US MO there?
E) Bomb the crap out of them, depose the leaders, install 'DemocracyTM' and move out before it's ready?
I figured I would leave off everything that wasn't emasculating to the USA, because that wouldn't make me a cool kid. This is my way of juxtaposing contemporary vogue political ideals, especially those off-topic favorites, with reality. I think it is hilarious.If their nuclear weapons facility were the target of that "first strike", and they were warned that developing nuclear weapons would result in a first strike, then yes, I can blame them for retaliating.
Which would raise up the question of why the US has a right to tell another country what to do with their technology, but meh; that discussion would just go in the standard circle.
When it comes to nuclear weapons in the hands of a dictatorial religious despot with overt desires and intentions to destroy entire populations, then not only does the US have a right, but it has a responsibility, to prevent mass genocide, no matter how un-PC this is.
Post by
Adamsm
When it comes to nuclear weapons in the hands of a dictatorial religious despot with overt desires and intentions to destroy entire populations, then not only does the US have a right, but it has a responsibility, to prevent mass genocide, no matter how un-PC this is.
Yet....the US is the only country to have ever used a nuclear weapon during a war time, and is the country calling for nuclear disarmament of everyone but themselves.
Though really, how is doing first strike mass genocide any better?
And this is why I originally deleted the post, since it would only lead to this.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.