Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

plastictrees wrote:Your juggling of condescension and false equivalencies is impressive. My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down. Your gun ownership analogy is more brilliant nonsense. Please explain to me how my stance makes a complex problem seem more manageable especially when set against your stance of "it doesn't cause any problems, you're wrong". That's a complex bit of thinking right there.

Ah, the Pièce de résistance! It's not that the thing itself is evil, it's that it contributes to a miasma of darkness, a mere soupçon of devilry in the grand buffet of women hatred.

You seem proud of the complexity of your foolishness, as if that insulates it from dismissal as foolishness. Guess what? The people that think Harry Potter can be an insidious tool of the occult can actually muster some pretty intense arguments. Doesn't make them any less silly.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Because Blazing Saddles is completely free from controversy. Always has been, of course. Everyone knows that.

I do like the intellectual bankruptcy here though: if you like it, it's a parody. If you don't it's another brink in the wall of oppression going all the way back to Eve and her apple.

I have never watched Blazing Saddles. I don't care about Blazing Saddles. Well done, you've caught me in your brilliant "intellectual bankruptcy" test.

plastictrees wrote:My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down.

Whose mindset? Yours? Or only people who are already fethed up enough to let a card game shape their morality?

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

I fail to see why it needs to be a "parody", or why anyone should concern themselves with the opinoin of scolds. It's a joke. One either finds it funny or not.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:Your juggling of condescension and false equivalencies is impressive. My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down. Your gun ownership analogy is more brilliant nonsense. Please explain to me how my stance makes a complex problem seem more manageable especially when set against your stance of "it doesn't cause any problems, you're wrong". That's a complex bit of thinking right there.

Ah, the Pièce de résistance! It's not that the thing itself is evil, it's that it contributes to a miasma of darkness, a mere soupçon of devilry in the grand buffet of women hatred.

You seem proud of the complexity of your foolishness, as if that insulates it from dismissal as foolishness. Guess what? The people that think Harry Potter can be an insidious tool of the occult can actually muster some pretty intense arguments. Doesn't make them any less silly.

Yup, you're right. Western society has a totally healthy perception of women. Suggesting otherwise is indeed equivalent to implying that the adventures of a boy wizard will lead to the earth being rent apart by Satan. I submit to your keen insight, the fragile core of my poorly conceived notions has been shattered.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

I fail to see why it needs to be a "parody", or why anyone should concern themselves with the opinoin of scolds. It's a joke. One either finds it funny or not.

???
You should probably be asking all the people that keep saying that "It's totally cool guys, it's just a parody".

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Because Blazing Saddles is completely free from controversy. Always has been, of course. Everyone knows that.

I do like the intellectual bankruptcy here though: if you like it, it's a parody. If you don't it's another brink in the wall of oppression going all the way back to Eve and her apple.

I have never watched Blazing Saddles. I don't care about Blazing Saddles. Well done, you've caught me in your brilliant "intellectual bankruptcy" test.

Wait, let me get this straight: I equate this product with Blazing Saddles, you dismiss this comparison on the basis that the movie is "genuine parody", imply Bento is not...

But you have no idea what Blazing Saddles is or if it actually treats the subject matter in any different fashion then Bento treats its own.

And you are of the opinion that this absolves you of the charge of intellectual bankruptcy?

Yup, you're right. Western society has a totally healthy perception of women. Suggesting otherwise is indeed equivalent to implying that the adventures of a boy wizard will lead to the earth being rent apart by Satan. I submit to your keen insight, the fragile core of my poorly conceived notions has been shattered.

Is this serious? Yes, clearly the West is lagging far behind... Thymiscara, I suppose, in appreciation of women. It's a wonder any can shake their fear to leave the house to attend their menial jobs or learn to read.

Of course, it could be worse, we could be like Japan, with their Basij terrorizing their womenfolk...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

I fail to see why it needs to be a "parody", or why anyone should concern themselves with the opinoin of scolds. It's a joke. One either finds it funny or not.

???
You should probably be asking all the people that keep saying that "It's totally cool guys, it's just a parody".

If they are advocating free expression, they are free to use whatever argument tickles their fancy. Scolds advocating limitations on expression must be more rigorous.

Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

Why is it that in a forum where people play WARGAMES and play unapologetically evil armies that the mere IMPLICATION of bumping uglies elicits such a vitriolic reaction?

Dark eldar for example. Nobody here bats an eyelash at the evil that they do, the S&M aesthetic that they bandy about. Heck if memory serves they actually use the word rape repeatedly in their codexes and books.

But in Tentacle Bento where the term "rape" is no where to be found people are up in arms.

I seriously didnt expect the same closed minded reactionary bullcrap that has hounded gamers and geek culture to be so well represented in DAKKA.

Bakerofish wrote:Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

Why is it that in a forum where people play WARGAMES and play unapologetically evil armies that the mere IMPLICATION of bumping uglies elicits such a vitriolic reaction?

Dark eldar for example. Nobody here bats an eyelash at the evil that they do, the S&M aesthetic that they bandy about. Heck if memory serves they actually use the word rape repeatedly in their codexes and books.

But in Tentacle Bento where the term "rape" is no where to be found people are up in arms.

I seriously didnt expect the same closed minded reactionary bullcrap that has hounded gamers and geek culture to be so well represented in DAKKA.

Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

Pick one or more of the above.

FYI: Since I started posting about an hour ago, the Find Tentacle Bento! page has racked (zing!) up more then $2000 in pledges.

Heck, when I started posting I was merely bemused, now I've put down filthy lucre for some of that sweet, sweet sinful stuff.

I plan to smear it all over my body.

AegisGrimm wrote:Especially when it's in a tabletop game, where the effects of firing upon a target are pretty damn abstract. Noone has ever screamed about the violence of chess, which wargames are simply a fancy chromed-up version of, where if a "guy' gets "shot' they just get removed from the board. Now... if you're talking movies and videogames with plenty of gratuitous and graphical/audible results from lethally attacking an opponent, that's an entirely different story.

The actual backstory of 40k is full to the brim with the stuff of nightmares. As in, some really fethd up gak is going on all over the place.

AegisGrimm wrote:Wargames of all types generally represent two forces meeting on a battlefield, where both are carrying guns. If onlookers are surprised by what comes next, they are pretty ignorant.

Now compare that to anything representing stalking and raping women......that's right up there with material graphically simulating torture or terrorism.

It's not about justification of the actions. It's about whether watching schoolgirls getting raped by tentacles is going to influence your attitude towards women and more than watching US Marines headshot Russian troops is going to influence your propensity towards (or acceptance of) aggression.

AegisGrimm wrote:It's not real, and because of that its perfectly legal, too, so you are within your rights to enjoy it. But most people likely think it's damn creepy that someone gets enjoyment out of it, and if you are defending it, don't go trying to pretend to be surprised by negative reactions.

And again, why do we find fantasy rape creepy and fantasy death perfectly acceptable? Kill Bill was the equivalent of hardcore porn in terms of made-up violence. It was also a high profile theatrical release. I don't recall any porn movies breaking box office records recently.

I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

His Master's Voice wrote:And again, why do we find fantasy rape creepy and fantasy death perfectly acceptable? Kill Bill was the equivalent of hardcore porn in terms of made-up violence. It was also a high profile theatrical release. I don't recall any porn movies breaking box office records recently.

In fairness, I would point out that in 2001 pornography was estimated to take $14 billion, compared to the 2009 domestic box office of $10.6 billion.

It's almost as if there is an enormous desire for sex, matched only by an equally large desire to disclaim any interest in such prurience. Strange, that...

@Buzzsaw

I read all of that already. What I dont get is WHY people still think that way

in DAKKA of all places

you know the exact same thing that they keep talking about, the mindset the aggression how its tearing the very fabric of our morality?

Thats the EXACT ARGUMENT that people have been using against VIDEOGAMES and RPGS since forever.

its been the exact same argument used against BOOKS.

but its "thats okay because i like books and videogames but its not for TB because I dont like anime or hentai"

wtf man...

Buzzsaw wrote:

Bakerofish wrote:Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

Why is it that in a forum where people play WARGAMES and play unapologetically evil armies that the mere IMPLICATION of bumping uglies elicits such a vitriolic reaction?

Dark eldar for example. Nobody here bats an eyelash at the evil that they do, the S&M aesthetic that they bandy about. Heck if memory serves they actually use the word rape repeatedly in their codexes and books.

But in Tentacle Bento where the term "rape" is no where to be found people are up in arms.

I seriously didnt expect the same closed minded reactionary bullcrap that has hounded gamers and geek culture to be so well represented in DAKKA.

Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

None of those things actually. Feel free to view me as Mrs. Lovejoy (or was it Maud Flanders?) though, whatever makes your strawmen easier to construct.

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

Are you a farmer, because you have quite the crop of straw men standing here.

You talk about "dislike of portrayals of rape"; is it a more offensive portrayal then the hundreds of uses of the word "[see forum posting rules]" in Blazing Saddles? No offense, but if "shock comedy/parody" is fine, you need to then establish why this particular example (bento) is not in the same category as an example you think is fine (Saddles). Otherwise you're just pointing at something you don't like and stamping your feet.

As for "Western society", exactly where are we falling down on the job, and how is Bento going to be the banana peel that makes us pratfall once more?

The mention of Romney is, frankly, incoherent. Which isn't surprising, but I feel it ought to be pointed out.

Buzzsaw wrote:
In fairness, I would point out that in 2001 pornography was estimated to take $14 billion, compared to the 2009 domestic box office of $10.6 billion. ...

Good thing you've read your links. First article bunks the whole 14 billion claim and sets much more modest questimate of 3 billion or so.
And that includes all forms of delivery (marital aids, digital services, dvds, stripclubs etc) VS first step of Hollywood movie profit making.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

Are you a farmer, because you have quite the crop of straw men standing here.

You talk about "dislike of portrayals of rape"; is it a more offensive portrayal then the hundreds of uses of the word "[see forum posting rules]" in Blazing Saddles? No offense, but if "shock comedy/parody" is fine, you need to then establish why this particular example (bento) is not in the same category as an example you think is fine (Saddles). Otherwise you're just pointing at something you don't like and stamping your feet.

As for "Western society", exactly where are we falling down on the job, and how is Bento going to be the banana peel that makes us pratfall once more?

The mention of Romney is, frankly, incoherent. Which isn't surprising, but I feel it ought to be pointed out.

An earlier poster in the thread referenced this which he equated with what Kickstarter is doing and is what I was referring to. Which part don't you understand?

So I need to explain why I haven't started an angry thread yelling about a near 40 year old movie in order for me to hold an opinion on portrayals of sexualised teenagers and rape? I have to dislike everything that you've conflated as being in the same "crazy politically correct" wheel house in order for my opinion to be valid? Let go of Blazing Saddles. I'm not going to go watch a movie in order to continue an internet debate in the manner in which you would like it to continue.

I'm not going to educate you on the status of women in, lets say the US in particular. I think we're getting well beyond the realm of Dakka Dakka here. If you're actually interested and not just being a smug prick then you can PM me. If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding.

plastictrees wrote:None of those things actually. Feel free to view me as Mrs. Lovejoy (or was it Maud Flanders?) though, whatever makes your strawmen easier to construct.

Again; we have a conflict here between freedom of expression and repression of expression, on the one hand, a very specific harm done to a very specific company trying to make a specific product, against which is... what, exactly?

We don't have to ask what happens when the scolds get together and companies buckle; we see exaclty what happens, peoples' expression is curtailed, avenues of funding are denied, accommodations are limited.

Against that we are presented with the argument of an ephemera, a hypothesis that can neither be proven nor dis-proven, but the claim is always that "this is not hysteria" is repeated loudly.

adhuin wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
In fairness, I would point out that in 2001 pornography was estimated to take $14 billion, compared to the 2009 domestic box office of $10.6 billion. ...

Good thing you've read your links. First article bunks the whole 14 billion claim and sets much more modest questimate of 3 billion or so.
And that includes all forms of delivery (marital aids, digital services, dvds, stripclubs etc) VS first step of Hollywood movie profit making.

I would quibble, but how about instead I quote this article?

It’s probably not unrealistic to say that porn makes up 30% of the total data transferred across the internet.

Truly, a pittance. No doubt consumed by obsessive loners in basements. Every last kilobyte!

PlasticTrees, you keep saying we're talking about pictures of girls getting raped. But that's obviously not the issue here. That's just how you're insisting we talk about it. You keep saying I'm calling you a prude for disliking pictures of women being raped (in other words, that I am not a prude because I must like pictures of women being raped?) when my argument is actually that equating this card game with an actual depiction of rape is prudish ... because it's simply not supported on its face.

Alternatively, you are appealing to rejection of a misogynistic worldview. But again that's really just you insisting that Tentacle Bento indicates a misogynic worldview. That's not something that we agree upon and so you can't just assume we can move on to argue about whether misogyny is a good thing or not where you depict me as a misogynist. I reject the assumption you are making about the game because your point of view is just moral panic. You have not been able to show how your position is not moral panic -- to the contrary, you've just kept insisting that I take your assumptions for granted.

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

If your going to take something out of context expect to get called on it.

My problem with this getting canceled and the whole issue in general is NOT the people who say "I disagree with this project and I can't bring myself to support it, nor would would I support it if it were my call to allow it."

My problem is the people who say " I disagree with this project. I'm going to write a million letters to Kickstarter to have it canceled right away."

Really? That's akin to Mitt Romney attacking a kid with a bleach blonde emo swoop because he didn't think it belonged in his enviroment.

I partly hold Kickstarter responsible. It doesnt appear to me the game upset their own moral codes, as it was reviewed before hand and even featured. They caved to pressure and cancelled the game because some people didn't like it.

Another example of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. That people haven't complained about Leisure Suit Larry Comes Again or The Smut Peddler is curious.

I can't abandon Kickstarter completely as they do some good work and enable things to hit market that normally couldn't, but I am disillusioned with them as a neutral supporter of all projects. Like Ouze said, it's a black eye on Kickstarter in general.

The message and obvious comparison is a distaste for people who aren't satisfied with not liking something, but rather feel the need to immediately have removed the things they dislike from their little worlds. In this, the people who went e-rage and battered Kickstarter with complaints until they removed TB are no different in intent from Romney, who was so angered by an emo kid he battered the poor bloke and with scissors cut away the parts he didn't think were acceptable. Maybe in the grand scale of things it's not an equally terrible act, but it's the same frame of mind. "I don't like it. It's different from what I accept. Burn the heretic idea to the ground."

Note: I've not at all said you are guilty of anything for your beliefs. I only mentioned how I viewed the outraged moral majority who had the project pulled.

Buzzsaw wrote:
Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

Pick one or more of the above.

FYI: Since I started posting about an hour ago, the Find Tentacle Bento! page has racked (zing!) up more then $2000 in pledges.

Heck, when I started posting I was merely bemused, now I've put down filthy lucre for some of that sweet, sweet sinful stuff.

I plan to smear it all over my body.

I'm actually on your "side" but your posting is making me reconsider that position, so good on you I guess?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

I'm still not seeing the portrayal of rape though? You can make an insinuation that it shares a genre with a type of animation that usually involves rape, but actually portraying it is a stretch and arguing it does your position no good.

I feel like the art shows it's clearly a spoof. There's no implication of rape in any of the pieces shown.

It's a cheeky, light hearted, spoof. If this was all about rape I would never post it here. Some people..

plastictrees wrote:An earlier poster in the thread referenced this which he equated with what Kickstarter is doing and is what I was referring to. Which part don't you understand?

So I need to explain why I haven't started an angry thread yelling about a near 40 year old movie in order for me to hold an opinion on portrayals of sexualised teenagers and rape? I have to dislike everything that you've conflated as being in the same "crazy politically correct" wheel house in order for my opinion to be valid? Let go of Blazing Saddles. I'm not going to go watch a movie in order to continue an internet debate in the manner in which you would like it to continue.

I'm not going to educate you on the status of women in, lets say the US in particular. I think we're getting well beyond the realm of Dakka Dakka here. If you're actually interested and not just being a smug prick then you can PM me. If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding.

I'm honestly beginning to think this is a lark, or a laugh you're having here.

This is babbling.

Either you accept that people can enjoy things you find upsetting, or you can't. Replace Blazing Saddles with whatever parody you actually are familiar with. If you can't think of anything, then the problem may just lie in you. Juuuuuust maybe.

The status of women in the US... yes, I often wonder how women can make it through the day. The horror.

I do have to say how enjoyable it is to see you in one post firmly disclaim that you are motivated by the notion that "sex is evil", and in another advise "If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding."

Because, after all, you're very sophisticated about all this. Very Sex-Positive, eh?

isnt this just a poke at people who like cartoon boobs?
nothing wrong with poking fun at them people... what were that called... saw it on sci fi a few years back with that jap lady (mmm she was nice)... cant remmeber it was a loner or something a pervert who sits in his room... oh well never mind.. this card game looks funny, but not very interesting

Brother Gyoken wrote:

I'm actually on your "side" but your posting is making me reconsider that position, so good on you I guess?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

I'm still not seeing the portrayal of rape though? You can make an insinuation that it shares a genre with a type of animation that usually involves rape, but actually portraying it is a stretch and arguing it does your position no good.

I feel like the art shows it's clearly a spoof. There's no implication of rape in any of the pieces shown.

Purely out of curiosity, I take from your comment that you feel I am mischaracterizing the argument of people like Plastic. To be clear, I am agreeing with Manchu's position that they represent the position of "moral panic", little different from the people that wrote letters to BioWare/EA complaining about the inclusion of SS relationships.

Do you feel I am wrongly characterizing them? How would you do so?

storm sheild relationships!!! the sick Bar stuards

So maybe move this back to a discussion on the actual events (which to be honest has been beaten to death already) rather than continue to belittling each other ideals and morals...or move the discussion of morals or lack thereof to Off-Topic.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:An earlier poster in the thread referenced this which he equated with what Kickstarter is doing and is what I was referring to. Which part don't you understand?

So I need to explain why I haven't started an angry thread yelling about a near 40 year old movie in order for me to hold an opinion on portrayals of sexualised teenagers and rape? I have to dislike everything that you've conflated as being in the same "crazy politically correct" wheel house in order for my opinion to be valid? Let go of Blazing Saddles. I'm not going to go watch a movie in order to continue an internet debate in the manner in which you would like it to continue.

I'm not going to educate you on the status of women in, lets say the US in particular. I think we're getting well beyond the realm of Dakka Dakka here. If you're actually interested and not just being a smug prick then you can PM me. If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding.

I'm honestly beginning to think this is a lark, or a laugh you're having here.

This is babbling.

Either you accept that people can enjoy things you find upsetting, or you can't. Replace Blazing Saddles with whatever parody you actually are familiar with. If you can't think of anything, then the problem may just lie in you. Juuuuuust maybe.

The status of women in the US... yes, I often wonder how women can make it through the day. The horror.

I do have to say how enjoyable it is to see you in one post firmly disclaim that you are motivated by the notion that "sex is evil", and in another advise "If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding."

Because, after all, you're very sophisticated about all this. Very Sex-Positive, eh?

So you don't masturbate then? Mentioning masturbation is equivalent to condemning sex? Who doesn't enjoy a good spank, and what the hell does that have to do with being "sex-positive"? You mentioned rubbing TB cards all over yourself or something similar, so obviously you enjoy the notion that you're upsetting whatever sort of person you think I am by supporting SodaPop.

Which part is babbling? The Mitt Romney reference which has been clearly explained? Your obsession with Blazing Saddles? Your point is essentially, if you dislike something, shut the feth up because someone likes it so it's ok.

Thank you for clarifying your stance on women's rights in the US.

To Manchu, I appreciate what you're saying. I believe that this type of forum discussion encourages people to summarize arguments in a way that can leave them very open to the black/white views that people tend to latch on to. I'm not about to put together the sort of image heavy essay necessary to better illustrate my position, and I mean that without sarcasm. I appreciate that the burden of "proof" is on me in the situation you're describing, I'm not prepared to take on that burden in this context.

Buzzsaw is feeding the parasprites.

Buzzsaw wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

I'm actually on your "side" but your posting is making me reconsider that position, so good on you I guess?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

I'm still not seeing the portrayal of rape though? You can make an insinuation that it shares a genre with a type of animation that usually involves rape, but actually portraying it is a stretch and arguing it does your position no good.

I feel like the art shows it's clearly a spoof. There's no implication of rape in any of the pieces shown.

Purely out of curiosity, I take from your comment that you feel I am mischaracterizing the argument of people like Plastic. To be clear, I am agreeing with Manchu's position that they represent the position of "moral panic", little different from the people that wrote letters to BioWare/EA complaining about the inclusion of SS relationships.

Do you feel I am wrongly characterizing them? How would you do so?

Seriously. I appreciate that not every one is making the shift from "intended as a hentai parody" to "trivialising rape" that I am. I have not stated that I think any of this sort of material should be restricted in any way, just that I understand why it would be by a private corporation or individual, and that I think, in general it has a negative impact on how women are percieved.
How are you corrolating that position with the bigoted opposition to the portrayal of consensual same-sex relationships in video games? Go on, explain to me how "portraying woman as delightfully rapeable is bad" is the same as "men having sex with men is bad".

plastictrees wrote:To Manchu, I appreciate what you're saying. I believe that this type of forum discussion encourages people to summarize arguments in a way that can leave them very open to the black/white views that people tend to latch on to. I'm not about to put together the sort of image heavy essay necessary to better illustrate my position, and I mean that without sarcasm. I appreciate that the burden of "proof" is on me in the situation you're describing, I'm not prepared to take on that burden in this context.

I sympathize with that position. And for what it's worth, I think your logic is completely on target when applied to other issues: for example, racists jokes are the result of racism. In this case, however, I don't think Tentacle Bento is a misogynist game that results from misogyny -- because I don't think it's misogynist. I'm okay with you thinking it is. I'm just debating here; I don't expect to convert everyone to my view even though I think my arguments are more compelling (why make them otherwise?).