riddle-me-this
The Riddler
riddle-me-this

I read it - and accurately analyzed it. You just don't like what I had to say. :) For example...

"I'm not sure how the hell you got the idea that I was saying we should do things just because they're hard."

Maybe it was the part where you said...

"So since it isn't easy we shouldn't do it? Ridiculous."

That's a more fair argument than what Sarkeesian presents. Her video is not making those kinds of suggestions. She's saying, "This is bad and needs to stop" while not supplying a realistic alternative, and also while ignoring or minimizing other information that contradicts her posit.

For example, she talks about

So since it isn't easy, we shouldn't do it? Ridiculous.

You make a better argument here than the one made by Sarkeesian. Let's examine it more closely. You have a video game where you are going to motivate the protagonist (the player) so that they start going out and doing stuff like fighting and traveling from place to place. What is their motivation?

In "Last of Us"

Pht - so all the faceless hordes of male minions that get mowed down by the thousands in EVERY video game have "autonomy and depth"? And no male in a video game ever dies to elicit an emotional response? What a load of bullcrap.

There is no resistance to thinking about it. People think about it and then realize that it is a ridiculous, myopic and inherently selfish argument that is attempting to take basic writing convention and falsely attempt to say it is a "womyn's problem". It's a stupid argument, and so it is rejected on that basis -

I'd never threaten anyone.

But I am dismissing her argument as navel-gazing clickbait. Every argument she makes in the video pretends that the common writing convention of having an antagonist actually doing things that MAKE them an antagonist is somehow 'abusive' to women. Balderdash.

But when you examine reality (I.E. stuff that happens in the real world every day) it is not a skewed portrayal. In fact, in places where real evil exists such abuse of women is common. Take ISIS, for example. Such abuse of the innocent is commonplace among extreme ideologies.

So it's simply not true that the

"Aside from invoking terrible attitudes about women, it's also a cheap writing trick. "A lazy shorthand for evil."

As long as the game soundtrack includes, "One Night In Bangkok", I'm in.

Changing the color on a grasshopper doesn't make it cute. :P Grasshoppers are the ugliest, creepiest, weirdest alien tank-gluttons in nature. Can't stand those grotesque little monsters. No color swap makes them any less abhorrent. And don't even get me started on the female ones when they're unfolding their own

Aw - well I have to agree to disagree on Octopussy. It's well paced, has a reasonable plot, and manages to avoid most (though certainly not all) of the goofiness in Moore's later Bonds. There are a few silly things, but the main plot is fine.

It sounds to me like you are saying, "borne of a movie that was not Bond's finest outing" and then saying "If Goldeneye was based on Octopussy then I'd agree". Isn't that saying that you think Octopussy is NOT one of Bond's finest outings?

Hey - Octopussy is a seriously underrated Bond movie.

More of a marketing ploy than a benefit, really. The number of times there are going to be drive train problems on a car are minuscule compared to other failure points.

Time for some uncomfortable truth telling...

The blog and a lot of the comments are blaming the division between middle-class white areas (so called gentrification) and poorer minority areas as "racism". But truth be told, this is not racism. It is economic stratification. The statistics of the racial percentages of

No argument there.

Participants "A" agreed to give up land in several peace deals that have been scuttled over the years by the Palestinians.

There. That was easy. Answered your question. Now give mine a shot.

Maybe with your perspective you can explain it - but how is it possible to achieve a peaceful solution to a conflict where "Participant B" has as its very first position that it refuses to acknowledge "Participant A" has a right to exist? Color me crazy, but I've never gotten any sense that that Palestinians have