deafblindmute
deafblindmute
deafblindmute

And while I am not a fan of a lot of DLC practices (I prefer some combination of microtransactions and the older, expansion model) I don't totally disagree that the devs are responding to consumers. My issue with Norman's statements is that she is basically saying, "you all shouldn't get to voice your opinions when

Production is a two way street. In the end consumers only have the options supplied to them by developers. But, devs are producing for the consumers. Sure, consumers only have the option to buy/not buy as they get no direct say over the final product, but devs should probably shut up and listen when the people who

Yeah well, it's the internet so losing sight of the argument is just what we do.

I'm actually not a liberal, so it's more like... far leftertrolling(?). Liberals and you right-wingers are actually pretty much identical on the broader political spectrum. You're just different angles on capitalist conservatives (they just don't want to admit it).

I'm sorry you felt like trolling was the only answer to your discomfort.

Again, we should look into words' definitions... By "logically fallacious" do you mean "I disagree with your interpretation"? If you argue against an actual point someone makes, it tends to be more effective than throwing out "logical fallacy" without knowing what that means. Lemme help clarify my argument for you:

Holy crap, I read this when I was a child. I think my parents have this book somewhere.

You should really research the word "fascist." If you believe that being PC or not PC really matters then you have already ascribed to a nationalist discourse in which ever more privileged "cores" of society unconsciously revel in their shared privilege. PC vs. not PC is essentially a question of how should we

"Political correctness" doesn't exist separate from the complaints of the over-privileged feeling their privileges being evened out. "Political correctness" is the interpretation of the over-privileged members of our culture of other people publicly discussing their own disenfranchisement. Essentially, you claiming

The reason I don't take that stance (one of emphasizing personal accountability) is that -isms (sexism, racism, etc.) aren't individual issues, but rather they are cultural. If you meet a really vicious misogynist, it's not because he (or she for that matter) is just some separate evil outlier; it is because our

The law of conservation of energy applies to the social. Every action we make is shaped by the nebula of actions and experiences with which we are surrounded. If we are in a culture in which it is more of a problem to be called out for demeaning someone (or an entire class of someone) than the actual demeaning is a

I don't think the tree thing is so literal. I just took it as an explanation that the blood could make life where there was none. The "woman" wasn't just a woman, but rather one of three magical beings/monsters whose heads are somehow required for entry into the lair (hence the other two cloaked figures in the

But I thought "Thou Shalt Only Have Sex In the Vagina" was a rider on commandment 15, "I Shalt Do Myself. If Thou So Chooseth, Thou Must Do Thyself."

I don't disagree at all, but sexism is all about stigma. Women are stigmatized, by our culture, as attention grabbing while men are not.

You are describing previous socialisms, but not socialism as an entire economic system. Socialism simply entails that means of production are publicly rather than privately owned. That does not require singular party control, so you could have very real elections.

It's not the title alone but the title in conjunction with the assumption that it is a shallow attention grab.

How do you figure?

It's more about the assumptions built into your description of her as "some chick" who just wants attention.

Your criticism of her trying to pull off some magical victory is sort of moot when the first thing she says in her campaign is that there is no way she (or anyone with even remotely similar interest in the well being of the people) could win.

For everyone saying "she's too young to legally be president," that's sort of part of the point. Her campaign is simultaneously deeply earnest and farcical. The point is that it really doesn't matter whether she is a 27 year old black woman or a 50 something white man. If you have the interests of the working