al3xt
Al3xT
al3xt

My problem is how the show sets up the conversation to be utter fodder.

How is an incredibly articulate and intelligent woman going to fair against a near dumb alpha male? She just utterly destroys him. Frankly, if you want to discuss catcalling you'd have to have an actually smart empathetic man discuss the smart

Oh I hundred percent agree. However, I think Ronald Dworkin's conception of morality/ethics is pretty close to our nations conception of morality and often what the Supreme Court uses. It seems the most consistent and easiest to apply in situations where others want to be condescending.

But, I agree with your criticism

Actually if you parse both sides, they both want more diverse characters in gaming—they just disagree on how that is achieved.

One side is meritorious and that is what is stoking the misogyny fire a la 4chan. They don't understand a meritorious formal equality just promotes sexism when its a boys club. They don't see

Actually, it is happening after the trolling (as expected).

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-the-…

But even before, me and you can both sit here and say she never meant to problematize them, but we would be missing the cultural problem underneath this entire mess.

You have to view the more reasonable dissent from

It is true disagreeing does not keep you from being wrong. But it appears you have a rather odd sense of morals.

The moment it becomes really "wrong" in a moral sense is likely when your personal liberty trumps others. And I don't see that as the argument of the dissent at all here.

I see the dissent, often frothing,

Well yea, you are essentially saying their way of conversing is completely inappropriate without trying to grapple with their rather asinine culture. (though you have and rejected it, they just don't know that)

It's like saying "no one gives a f*ck about your feelings," after you just posted about treating others as

Yes, and remember to tell all your friends to call the accused rapists before and after whether they are found guilty or not by the preponderance standard at your school. constructive fairness.

Ha, I like you. But my intentions are reasonableness.

Ah, I see you like the ill-conceived feminist argument mansplaining. An impasse that only results in me saying, "You 'splained me first." Nothing accomplished!

Sure, insult me as low wattage and a brooding misogynist. But honestly, how many men actually know about sex-positive and theory surrounding sex as a commodity?

Look, if I accept your take then everyone must be a learned feminist from birth that speaks eloquently at every life turn and never lapses ad infinitum. If I

Wasn't a violent and deranged encounter, you know, the reason most women say they fear walking alone at night.

Perhaps, but why not say that instead of claiming the video shows him being a flat out misogynist with no qualification? Simple—because the buzzword is an easy ploy on this site.

You need to be able to see context in social media. Not everyone is brought up with a silver spoon in their mouth and has an education in

Ugh, sorry but no. Please don't spread divisive misinformation most people likely won't watch.

He is not advocating misogyny, or at least to the degree that would deem him endorsing rape.

First he discusses masculinity problems. Second, he discusses problem with dating a certain type of girl. In discussing this second

Yeah I can see that, but I also think the question works to explain why a lot of women have actually up-and-left a lot of powerful positions to spend more time with their families. Frankly, I think a lot of the backlash may actually stem from it being a man asking the question. That's understandable, but that also has

Many women have said this. Ann Marie Slaughter brought the question to the fore front two years ago. It's been discussed in women's literature religiously since the early 1990's.

Its about the fiction society feeds young women about having a career and the expectations involved. It can often lead to incredible guilt.

All of that is true except you need to understand that RFRA's second prong narrows everything a lot, which has been swept aside in the rhetoric. A least restrictive means test would heavily outweigh religious freedom where no alternative exists. Here, what really sold the justices (and it was apparent from the oral

Richman got womansplained!

I totally get how her interpretation mattered, but she also forced that interpretation onto him in a pretty terrible way.

Well, its probably because rape encompasses a pretty vast contextual situation, and the n-word was a slur toward an individual audience member. Your right the issues are completely divisive, but there is considerable nuance with the presentation of both.

yup, alpha's reassurance is just going and cheating on you lol

I enjoy the nuance, but do you think it would biased on actual socio-bioligical problems? Like men not wanting to be women because of the fear of rape?

To me, I see a lot of superficial advantages to being a woman (I am a man). You have a lot of options, you can wear dresses, you can enjoy really tacky things, and you