Original System: PlayStation 2

Oh yeah, that first level. What a way to get me into the game. An amazing experience. Glad you beat me to posting it, now I don't haves to!

Game:

I couldn't get the emotion without the context, so I had to read the link... you win this one, Gawker.

It's a fair question I guess. You mean like on this site and not like on Earth right? It's because I'm very interested in the feminist movement, being put on by my girlfriend and a very cool professor, and Simone de Beauvoir. This is one of the few sites I know of. However, just like any other movement, this one…

After some thought, I guess it could be the case that women wear makeup only for themselves, but it still seems connected to a kind of low esteem ("my own face isn't good enough, let's cover it with makeup") and that's hella weak. Still, women can do what they want for whatever reason they want, but I'm sure at least…

If a regular dude said that, it's misogyny! Lol

I don't know the atheists you know, but the vocal (aka "angry") ones I see are merely reacting to religious privilege, bullying, and intrusion into their lives (or just being who they are and trust me to some religious ppl having the audacity to BE ATHIEST is the asshole angry move). This narrative that there's some…

"I'm an egalitarian that specializes in feminism."? I can dig that. I guess I'm just general practice.

To play devil's advocate and to show maybe we can agree on something I must admit I do think claiming feminism is a great tactic in our society, like "this is where most of my political time and energy is spent", that's totally legit and reasonable and pragmatic. Just like there are abortion voters and gun voters and…

yes ma'am, thanks for clearing that up.

Well as I said I'll get back to you, and now I am.

I've been steeped in feminism from my own personal research to college professors and women's studies student friends to my girlfriend. It isn't just a semantics issue, though it is that, it's an issue of focus and inclusion.

Glad you're being patient, but I require no more patience than any intelligent conversation I think. I'm not a troll either in that I'm not trying to provoke a reaction for my own amusement. For better or for worse I am earnestly engaged and asking questions.

Sure I will, I'm a man of my word but I have stuff to do today. Also, what's wrong with my commenting history? I bet you disagree with me that's cool but I'm not a jerk or a troll I don't think. I try to be respectful (a few jokes aside maybe) and actually thoughtful not just "feminazi this and misandry that".

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. It's like good food for thought let me chew on it a while and get back at ya maybe.

Maybe the water is poorly written and doesn't make good valid points for you like you think it did.

What's funny is that the two articles you've referred me to, I've read them a while ago. Of course I've been referred to them before. They aren't good articles, even if you get past the condescending snark.

whoops: I meant "not good". sorry.

Thanks for the reply. I don't think feminISTS have to be exclusionary, and so many prove that with their involvement in other issues. I think feminISM does have to be exclusionary because "fem" is built right into the name. Of course, you can redefine feminism so as to mean egalitarianism or anything else. In this…