Er, no. Actually. That's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. Like I said, manga (the medium) is for everyone. Period. Stop. However, and this is the point I was making, is that there are specific genres within manga that cater to various audiences. So, you have shounen fighting manga like Naruto and…

I'm...not sure what you were getting at? Were you agreeing with me? We do have TV for everyone, but not all TV is "for" all people. Spike TV has its demographic, MLP is aimed at one crowd, and subsequently, when someone else (like an adult male) likes it, it's largely treated as an bad thing.

I can't make blanket generalizations, but I can tell you that in my experience, the concept of...intellectual/geeky things are often my by violence and/or contempt in the young black community. I mean, I grew up in the south, and endured that hellishness and being black and not playing football is practically a sin,…

Oh, I remember that. I got regular beating as a young man. The black kids hated me because I "talked white" and the white kids hated me because...well...I wasn't white and it's the South. But yeah, that is very true, there are cultural expectations, and most people fall in line with that. My proverbial brothers…

I love it when I want to play a game, and then a review makes me not want to play it based on principle because it's unapologetically insulting. Good job!

Huh, this is pretty much the opposite of the write-up of the one over at IGN. Drama!

Please, tell me what about this scene implies battle.

I assume you are talking about the giant nautilus.

Have women stopped wearing lingerie when I wasn't looking? That's odd.

And without slavery, I would not exist. Similarly without the Manhattan Project, much of our understanding of quantum physics would be stunted, and we'd be decades behind on certain medical technologies. It also arguably prevented a third World War with the threat of mutually assured destruction.

The difference is…

The Patriarchy or as I like to call it, "Well, history happened and we succeeded as a species and it's not always super great, but it's better than being extinct."

And you've pretty much just stated why womanism and feminism are both inherently disadvantageous for me to associate with.

The term male power fantasy is asinine and boorish. It is demonstrative of nothing, except the puerile belief that somehow men manage to be so monolithic as to share the same basic idea of what their idealized form is. My mention of the exaggerated portions of the male armor are just that, mention of the convention…

Why would I? I am perfectly fine being labeled a egalitarian. Eqaulity is a good thing, I just find certain...very, very vocal groups of feminists repugnant and awful as human beings, and wouldn't want to be associated with them. And the intersectionality of womanism is strongly tilted toward women, and…

It is gender neutral, I will contend, with this as the point: firstly, you are looking at historical context, which is fine, if we were talking about an accurate representation of say, a medieval game. However, and this is important, we are not. You are conflating two very different things, historical armor and…

I'm far from a feminist, I assure you. Hence, I have no particular love for the movement. You did read that part, right?

And this has absolutely nothing to do with the current conversation, so it is pointless. I have no particular love of feminists for personal reasons, but unless it is germane to the conversation, it's irrelevant.

Parts of the ideology do, yes, but not all of them. Same could be said of certain groups of men. What's your point?

Perhaps we have a differing opinion of what a criticism constitutes. Rather than acknowledging the effort, or rather devoting a half-thought to it, you instead criticized the very idea of what it was trying to accomplish (and using some spurious logic to do so) for two paragraphs.

No pleasing some people, I suppose.