It's good for people to grieve. When someone you loves dies, you need to mourn them. Grieve for a while. Then move on with your life. When something reminds you of the lost ones, you stop, think of them fondly, and remember what they meant to you. It's a healthy process.
As a nation, we've moved well past healthy. Two thousand, nine hundred seventy seven people died. That's a lot of friends and family that had to grieve. As a country, we banded together and grieved with them. We took up their grief and wore it like a badge of pride. Every year, the anniversary of the event comes around again and we wrap ourselves in patriotism and declare with one voice that we will never forget.
Except... maybe we should. If not forget, at least tone down the rhetoric and jingoism. 15 years is a really long time to hold onto a loss. If a person went to these lengths to remember someone that died, most people would tell them to seek therapy. You need to let it go in order to move forward. That doesn't mean forgetting it entirely, or pretending it didn't happen. It means moving forward.
The scar of 9/11 is part of the national psyche now. It will likely go down with 'Remember the Alamo' and 'Remember Pearl Harbor'. Those patriotic cries faded after the war they were attached to ended. The events remembered, but the sting of them removed.
This year, in November, newly minted voters will go to the polls and not be able to remember 9/11. But the conflict associated with it is on-going. They have spent their entire memorable life with people on TV dying in a 'war'. Every year on 9/11, the country pulls out all the stops to remind them why they're fighting.
Maybe we should all look forward. It's fine to remember your loved ones. But this national pastime needs to stop.
Josh Duggar wants to get back on TV. I know, that sounds far fetched. The child molesting fucktard thinks that enough time has passed that he can waltz onto a talk show, preach his special brand of bullshit, blame the devil, beg forgiveness for his flawed human nature and everything will be fine. Then TLC will give him his own TV show to let him live the high life some more.
See, this is the central flaw in Christianity. That idea that saying your sorry means total forgiveness. And if God/Jesus forgives him, everyone else should forget about what he did too. It helps if you can offload your own failing onto something else insubstantial and unearthly. I mean, if the devil made you do it, what chance did you have? He's an all powerful demon with an eternity to plot your personal downfall. He spent eons thinking up ways to exploit the tiny cracks in your character to make you fall from grace for just one second.
On top of that, Josh thinks that simply offering up his apology, even if sincerely felt, puts everything back to a correct place in the world. That, because he said 'my bad', not only must we forgive, but he deserves to be put back into the limelight. That not only must all good Christians overlook his foibles, but we must assist in his return to 'fame' and fortune.
Not every mistake made by person is the same. Some people slip up and deserve to be redeemed with an apology. This isn't one of those times. Josh shouldn't get to be famous again. He doesn't deserve it. If you want to live a penitent and 'forgiven' life, maybe you should avoid the spotlight. After all, the devil can tempt you better there, right? If you come out from under the rock you've been hiding under, you should expect infamy and ridicule. Not forgiveness and adulation.
Really, let us be honest here. You deserve nothing. You're scum. Want to prove you're not? Spend the rest of your life making up for your mistakes. Until then, fuck off.
Fuck you and have a nice day. In one of those rare moments, I get to say that after punishment has been meted out.
You see, Trooper... ahem... former Trooper Hamilton is an asshole. He pulls you over for a speeding ticket. Everyone hates it. You're caught, you know it, you're pissed off, and you're out a bunch of money. Best case you get a warning and waste 20 minutes. Amazingly, this prick makes a routine traffic stop even more excruciating. His third question after 'do you know how fast you were going?' and 'Can you provide me with your license and registration?' is not in the standard police guidelines.
'What Chruch do you go to?' and the follow up 'Are you Saved?'. He also provides directions if you want to attend his Chruch. yes, of COURSE he provides pamphlets.
Seriously. go fuck yourself. The last thing ANYONE wants to talk about when they're getting a ticket is religion. The nicest pastor in the most cordial Church since the beginning of man doesn't want to talk about it then. But hey. He got fired yesterday. So I can't be made at Indiana. He got a warning 18 months ago to knock it off and now his ass is walking the unemployment line.
When asked about it, this is his comment:
"Oh well... I'm just following what the Lord told me to do and you can't change what the Lord tells you to do. So if the Lord tells me to speak about Jesus Christ, I do. And that's why they fired me so that's where we're at"
What a douche.
It's been a long time since I saw them, but not long enough.
When I say that my time in high school was the worst on my life, please understand that the sentiment is not said casually or jokingly. They are the low point of my life. Every day further from the torture and anguish I suffered in that school is an improvement in my well being. There is a little more haze on the pain, and a little less clarity to the faces.
I survived high school. Barely.
Of my classmates, I call none of them friends. None of them even rate the level of an acquaintance. Since leaving that school, I have spoken to none of them. Beyond the missives requesting my attendance to these regular demarcations of when we graduated, I don't know if they're alive or dead. I don't care if they're better people. I don't want to know who got fatter or thinner; whose hairline has receded; who procreated; whose job pays the most.
None of that matters. They were vile people. While some degree of that can be forgiven in youth, I see no reason to put myself in their presence again. The worst case scenario is that seeing them reopens wounds long since scarred over. The best case is the prostrate themselves before me begging for my forgiveness. The likelihood is that I would discover nothing more than some of them are as bad as ever, some are worse, and a precious few managed to improve themselves into something that doesn't make me want to punch them.
I can see no instance where meeting them would make me want to reconnect or repeat the experience. To be honest, I'd be better off going to a random school that graduated the same year and trying to get to know those people. Those random people would have the advantage of not having a plethora of hideous memories attached to them.
Those reprobates are all shadows of my past. And despite these attempts to crawl out of the dark recesses of my memories, and asking me to relive it all, I condemn them to remain memories. The crimes and abuses committed are left unvarying moments etched in the past. I do not forgive. I don't foresee any future far enough away to forget.
I want to be clear here. When you say make a statement that statement doesn't get to exist in a vacuum. Doesn't matter if it was an argument for a position on racism or a commentary on your favorite color. When you open your mouth and present an idea, that idea is open to commentary, debate and criticism.
Safe spaces? Trigger warnings? No. Those are ideas designed restrict the free exchange of ideas. When you say the best Halloween costume is a mummy, I get to tell you why I disagree. That's how free expression works. Instead you want to lock it down and hide behind the idea that I need to warn you that I might say something that offends you or doesn't conform to your worldview so you can avoid it. Or worse, so you can exclude my view from your 'open forum'. No.
No warnings. No limits. I'm sorry if my brash nature damages your sensitive little ears, but I will stand up and I will be heard. I won't censor myself because you want me to. My ability to speak my mind is no less relevant that yours. You want a safe place? You want a home? You want an echo chamber? Then let me introduce you to a little place I like to call private property. When you own the land you stand on, feel free to build a wall to keep my views out. But on public property, and out in the anonymity of the digital landscape, my views have the same right as yours.
Do I offend you with my ideas? I don't give two shits. As I've said before, you're welcome to be offended. Feel free to tell me about how much I offended you. Discuss it like a rational person. If you make a good point, I might change my mind. But you don't get tape my mouth shut because you don't want to hear it. There is a chance (though infinitesimally small) you might open your ear, understand what I said and allow it to have an impact on you.
You want a warning that something I say might offend you. How about this: Something I say will probably offend you. The part you need to concern yourself with is whether or not you can move past your offense and examine the issue at hand like an adult. Until that happens, warnings and safe spaces are just ways to shrink your world down to include only those that agree with every utterance you make.
This is your choice. Stride boldly out and confront that which offends you, or curl up into a ball and pretend it doesn't exist. I will not help you do the latter, but if you ever decide to do the former, you can be assured that I will stand up and make sure others can't silence you. Even if your position is stupid as fuck.
46 years ago yesterday, Man walked on the moon. It's an accomplishment that I still consider unparalleled to this day. We've done many wonderful things since then, but it is somehow all the more amazing for the time period, the technology, the speed and the success rate that they achieved.
So, this morning, upon getting in my car, el douchbag radio DJ started my ride by talking about how the entire thing was a hoax.
Readers of my previous comment and posts might know my feelings for this particular conspiracy theory, but if you're new, here's the deal. It's bullshit. We landed on the moon. Multiple times. We can prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt.
The people that belief this lie are either really ignorant, really invested in it, or really gullible. In most cases, you can pick two.
They have a lot of 'reasons' for this: the pictures don't have stars (it's daytime so light reflection obscures them), the flag moves in the 'wind' (inertia from the astronauts contact), the pictures are well focused (technology and practice), the radiation would have killed them (minimal exposure during a period carefully selected to be low), and the dust doesn't bounce correctly (it does).
Every objection put forward has been debunked repeatedly. If that wasn't proof enough, we brought back fucking rocks. They're different from earth rocks in a number of easily discerned ways. If we try real hard, we can still see the fucking landers there. We left reflectors on the moon. If you know how, and have a laser, you can still bounce a laser off of one. It's an ongoing project so we can measure the moon's movement away from Earth. And finally? The soviets were watching us. If we'd faked it, they would have noticed. They tracked the radio signals, and radar. They would have said something.
So, dumbass radio jockey? fuck you. It is people with your combination of low intelligence and large mouth piece that helps keep this set of lies alive. I almost wish I had paid attention to which morning show crap fest you were on so I could call you out by name. But saying your name would still be some level of raising your profile. Either way, fuck you.
Today there was another killing somewhere in the world. Unstable/Insane person A didn't like person or group B and decided to kill them. Person A obtained the gun/explosive/knife/spork required for the deranged plan and then went to place C to execute it. Person or Group B was injured/died.
This story happens regularly. And you can almost see the orgy of excitement in the faces of the 24 hours news moguls. They love this. They get to examine person A and group B and take reaction videos from everyone who ever knew anyone remotely involved. In the era of cellphones, they have a decent chance of getting footage from somewhere that they can broadcast with grisly warnings about the graphic nature of the following footage. They can hunt down photos of the victims and perpetrator and try to psychoanalyze everyone and everything. They have to manufacture spurious statements about intent and ideology. They have days of news filled off this single event.
People have died. And the media are masturbating to the corpses.
"All right," said Susan. "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need... fantasies to make life bearable."
REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE.
"Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little?"
YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.
"So we can believe the big ones?"
YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING.
"They're not the same at all!"
YOU THINK SO? THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF JUSTICE, ONE MOLECULE OF MERCY. AND YET -Death waved a hand. AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED.
"Yes, but people have got to believe that, or what's the point?"
MY POINT EXACTLY."
-Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
You will be missed, my friend. Farewell.
Oklahoma legislators want to get rid of AP US History. It's not shocking. Sad perhaps, but not shocking. Let me back up some first though. AP courses are designed to offer college bound high school students a chance to take entry level college course and receive credit for them while in their senior year of high school. These courses are harder and put an emphasis on critical thinking, writing, and analysis. If you pass a test at the end of the course, you get credit toward an equivalent course that most colleges will accept.
So, you might wonder, why would Oklahoma legislators have a problem with AP courses and the US history one in particular? Well that's easy. They're stupid.
I don't say that casually. They're upset because they don't like the curriculum. They claim that it's leftist revisionist propaganda that portrays American history in a negative light. I'll even be a nice as I can to the and say that is true to some extent. It does highlight negative events. But almost all of history does that. Wars, revolution, repression and conflict are negative events.
Those are the highlight reels of every history class I've ever been in. I mean, we could talk about the 50s without mentioning McCarthyism, but much of it doesn't make sense. We could talk about Vietnam, but without the anti-war perspective, it's worthless. You could talk about the Civil War without mentioning slavery, but it would be worthless. You could talk about the Articles of Confederacy, but if you don't mention the shortcomings, you can't talk about why they failed. The founding fathers had some great ideas, but some pretty horrible ones too. Nearly every single decade of this country has some form of major negative event.
The stupid legislators in Oklahoma want to pretend that America is exceptional; that manifest destiny wasn't racially motivated; that the 10 commandments mattered to a large group of deists; that war only consists of American heroes. More importantly, they want kids to believe deeply in how great this country is, and how it can do no wrong.
I, on the other hand, want to know what mistakes we made in the past in order to learn from them. When I studied the Great Depression, it taught me a lot about economics and how they impacted average people. The Civil War and Civil Rights movements demonstrate the failure to provide equality to minority groups. The foibles of the Founding Fathers show us that even men with great ideals can make a deal with the devil in order to take a step forward for the country. There are so many mistakes in our past that we need to learn from. Failure to teach them does our children an injustice. We just need to put them into perspective and teach the reasoning that drove the people involved to make the choices they made, and explain the intended and unintended consequences of those actions.
That's not to say we shouldn't teach the good moments. Talk about the Battle of the Bulge, the moon landing, the Berlin wall's collapse. Bring up the Swamp Fox, and roaring 20s. Paint both sides well and true.
There is no place for lies though. We can't paint over our failures as a nation and pretend they didn't happen. Those failures are ours. We have to own them and learn from them.
Whitewashing history is bad. Limiting a child's ability to learn is bad. Injuring their chances as college education is bad. That is obvious.
Something else is obvious: Oklahoma lawmakers are stupid and they want everyone else to be stupid too.
Let's play a game. I'm going to list off some quotes. Then I'll ask you some questions about the speaker. Don't Google it. That's cheating!
'Obviously rape is awful..  What is beautiful is the child that could come from this'
'...every cloud has a silver lining. It's just that this cloud is a rape. Every rape cloud can have a baby as a silver lining'
'Now it's all 'War on Women' this and 'my body, my choice' that and 'don't lay your theocratic mitts on my uterus you backwards thinking jerkface.' And I think our country is now lost morally because of it'
'They just need to think of a rape baby as God putting one in you, is all'
'God works in mysterious, sometimes kinda rapey ways'
Now. No peeking.
Man or woman?
What state are the from?
Let's see how you did: Male. About 40. White. Republican. State Representative. West Virginia.
How'd ya do? I guessed Mississippi and 50, but I feel like WV isn't very far off of the sexist spectrum.
For the record, Brian Kurcaba is a loser. He's a pathetic sack of shit, who will hopefully never know the horror of being raped personally, or have one of his loved ones suffer the fate.
You're a walking talking stereotype of a hateful sexist pig. Everything about you represents that. I could rail on and on about how horrible a person you are. But really, what more needs to be said. You are what you are.
It took me a few tries to write this. I just couldn't express my rage and loathing properly. People are finally starting to understand something I've been yelling about for years.
Vaccinations are important. It's not just something that's good to have. They're something that should be automatically given to everyone that can have them. People who refuse them should have legitimate health reasons for refusal. A friend of mine's kid has cancer, which has damaged her immune system to the point where vaccinations are dangerous. That is perfectly legitimate. I'm willing to allow limited exceptions for religious reasons, so that communities like the Amish aren't forced into it. I think it's stupid, but I accept that the nature of those communities also limits potential exposure and spread.
The rest of you? The worshipers of Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield? You people can all go fuck yourself. You were told over and over again that vaccinations are highly safe. You were told that the link to autism were false. You refused to listen and created grand conspiracy theories to cover your mindless stupidity. You dismissed facts and research if it disagreed with your preconceived notions. You claimed that 'organic' and 'natural' methods were the best way to raise healthy babies.
YOU WERE WRONG.
And you should have known better. So, now, one of your brethren has spread this pestilence in a place where millions go every year. And more of your brethren picked it up and spread it across the country. From there, it spreads to other likeminded idiots like you. And in the blink of an eye, a loan case of stupid becomes a fucking wave of stupid. And parents of sick children get to sequester their children at home because you choose to ignore all medical research, all educated advice, and all good common sense. And all of that is in addition to the potential damage to your own crotch spawn that are also unprotected from this outbreak.
There is only one way to describe your behavior. Neglectful. You're a bad parent. You willfully exposed your child, and thousands of others to potentially dangerous diseases based on information that you were repeatedly told was false.
I think every single parent who prevents their healthy child from getting vaccinated should be charged with criminal negligence and child endangerment. No jail time, or taking the kids away. Just force these parents to work as candy stripers in hospital wards to see the full effect of it. Or better yet, a few weeks in a country where measles isn't the rarity that it is the US.
Anti-vaccination drones are scum. They've build their beliefs around a lie, even after being told the truth. Now, those lives have hurt people. If they're lucky, no one will die. Regardless, we should hold them personally responsible for their actions.
Stop me if you've heard this one. 3 men walk into a newspaper publishing house. They kill people that write things that offended them.
That's the real gist of the story. Dick-Bag (DB), Douche-Canoe (DC), and Rectal Prolapse (RP) decided that some guy's cartoons were so offensive that not only did he merit murder, but the three of them were the ones to do it. The victims offended these three people personally. The murdering fuck-sticks were deluded into believing in a deity or higher power, and because all such higher powers invariable agree 100% with the person believing in them, they naturally assumed that Allah also was offended, thus perpetuating the horrors of dogmatic belief. The great part about this delusion is that since Allah was offended, killing these people was a divine right, mandated by god himself, so not only was it their duty to commit murder, it was justifiably right and wholesome to do so.
Let's step back a moment and focus on the original problem. DB, DC and RP were offended. That is the root of the problem. They come from a society where being offended is such a horrible thing that it demands an escalation from speech to action.
I get offended all of the time. I'm allowed. Nickleback offends me. Dick Cheney offends me. Pro-lifers offend me. Born-again Christians offend me. Homeopathy offends me. Anti-vaccination advocates offend me. The NSA offends me. The actions of DB, DC and RP offend me.
Being offended is fine. Nothing happens when you get offended. You don't get offended and wake up the next day with Ebola. You get offended and you get over it.
Offense is subjective. What offends me might not offend you. Offense is limited to a person, group, culture, or society. Offense is not right and wrong. Just because something offends you, it doesn't mean that thing is intrinsically wrong to all people. It's just a thing that offends you. There is nothing wrong with being offended.
If I say something that offends you, you get to be offended. That's it. You're welcome to attempt to offend me back if you want. You've got a right to be offended. But you don't have a right to expect me to not offend you. And you absolutely don't get to attack and murder people because they dared to offend you.
I'm not sorry they were offended. I don't care that they were offended. They deserve to be offended. People that are willing to kill others over religious beliefs deserve to be offended. They didn't like the depictions of Mohammed? Don't look at them. Grow the fuck up. People teach their child about sticks and stones, right? I assume that's not a thing in the Muslim world?
More than that, everyone should be offended at something. If you live in a cloud where nothing offends you, you must belief that world is absolutely perfect exactly as it is. If people weren't offended at things, they wouldn't be trying to improve them. And since offense is subjective, various groups are working against each other to correct the offenses that bother them. That's all well and good. I don't like pro-lifers, but I understand that my beliefs offend them, and they want to fix that. Good on them. But that doesn't mean I roll over and let them do whatever they want. Their beliefs offend me, and I stand up for what I think. That doesn't mean I shoot them in the street. I just argue for the things I believe and have hope that in the end everyone will come to terms with something acceptable to most people. That's how free societies work. It's the ONLY way they work.
Of course, that's not the type of society these 3 killers want. They want a theocracy where everyone bows to the same imaginary friend and follows the same arbitrary rules written by people hundreds of years ago who believed that a 53 year old having sex with a 10 year old was acceptable. They want to convert or kill anyone who disagrees with them. They want to suppress ideas that cause doubt about their ideals. They want uniformity. They want unquestioning lockstep belief. They don't want to ever be offended. Nothing that offends them will be allowed to exist.
And that offends me.
It's a simple question, but if you believe the media and the political spin artists, there is a fine line that is difficult to place properly. I say that it's simple. So simple that the framers of the constitution addressed and codified it years ago.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
Now, let me clear. I'm not making a legal case here. I'm saying that this is the basis of behavior exemplified in the founding document of the United States. It simply states that if a punishment is overly cruel or inhumanly unusual, it shall not be allowed.
Again, the spin artists try to haze this by throwing up three main distractions: the victims were 1) not in the US 2) Not US citizens and 3) withholding information that could protect the country from another 9/11.
All of which I immediately deem irrelevant. If my sister were the subject of any of the abuses laid out in the recent report, the location of the occurrence would not suddenly make it appropriate. Nor would I care if the person doing it wasn't from the same country as her, or bound by some legal framework. It's clearly horrific and no one needed to check a desk reference book to understand that. And finally, the claim that they were holding valuable information is likewise irrelevant, not only because it likely isn't true, but because there is no valid reason to sink to barbarism. That's what this is.
Cruel and unusual. I don't care if you call it torture or a technique. This report demonstrated that our government performed cruel and unusual punishment on captives. Each and every person that created, suggested, assisted, authorized, approved, and performed them should be ashamed. I would even suggest imprisoned / institutionalized for the rest of their lives as well, but I'm fully aware that the murky legal framework they built up to protect themselves will prevent much of that from occurring.
Regardless of the legal footing, let us not kid ourselves with euphemisms and coy language. This was abhorrent behavior, and clearly it stands in contrast to the ideas espoused in the 8th amendment. If we want to be the country our forefathers envisioned, we cannot stoop to this level of behavior.
You were the former head of the CIA and NSA. It was your job to provide intelligence and security to the country following 9/11. After the recent torture report's release, you had a lot of mother fucking gall in your response. Your response was despicable.
'I was in government for ten years after 9/11, and let me tell ya, a phrase I never heard from anybody in any position of authority: 'Whatever you guys do about this terrorism threat, please, please don't overreact.'
No one told you not to overreact? Why on earth should someone feel the need to spell that out for you? The violations detailed in report aren't a tiny over-reaction. They're heinous, horrific and completely illegal. No one has to walk up to me and remind me not to pummel random people on the street because I'm having a bad day. No one fucking has to. Its basic god damned common sense. You're the fucking head of a major division devoted to intelligence. You're supposed to fucking have some of your own in order to make choices based on that intelligence.
I learned about rectal feeding today. No one should ever utter that sentence, Michael. No one. But here we are. They pureed food and shoved it up prisoner's asses. To be clear, the body doesn't process any of it. It can't. Because that's not the fucking end you eat with. There is no medical value. You authorized it. You supported it. You tried to hide it. And now that it's out there, your response is 'no one told you not to'???
Fuck you. No one told you. A 5 year old knows that's not a valid response to getting caught breaking the rules. And that's for eating a cookie he wasn't supposed to. You authorized the systematic torture of prisoners. No one told you not to overreact?
How the fuck do you live with yourself? Seriously, it's depraved. It's the product of a diseased mind. While I can forgive and perhaps even excuse the existence of a single such mind inside the CIA, you fucking signed off on it. Someone sick fuck suggested it. Some other sick fuck passed it on. You approved it, either through actively signing the order or attempting to cowardly avoid knowledge of the details. Then a whole different group of degenerates fucking did it. That's not a singular diseased cell. It's a full grown cancerous mass. And like all cancer, it needs to be irradiated, cut out, and thrown away. We should dispose of you in the darkest deepest cell we can find and only take you out to be paraded around for future generations so that people can never forget the horrible cost of allowing people to think they human rights might not be applied universally.
People like you are scum. You try to hide behind the idea of greater good and protecting freedom, but that's not true at all. You're not the masked superhero protecting us from evil. You're the villain. You're the evil. As much as you and your ilk love to pretend that 9/11 was the worst thing that ever happened, I offer up that you are worse.
You're worse because you aren't crazy people deluded into murder by delusions of divine purpose. You rationally considered your course, laid it out, trained people to ignore their humanity, and set them on prisoners without conscience. You did it because you were tiny, spineless cowards uncomfortable with the idea that your wishes don't sprout wings and instantly make the world into how you want it to be.
I do not accept that no one told you not to be human filth. You either know that intrinsically, or you don't. And if you don't, no one can help you. You are what you are:
Written by Roulette...
I've avoided a lot of comment and outrage on this. Partly because I try not to care, and partly because the only people willing to actually listen are people that already agree with me.
For a lack of better terms there are a number of groups involved in this: average gamers, game "journalists", misogynists, and feminists. Depending on which spin you're listening to, the facts of the case change dramatically. For example, the extreme section of the feminists claim that average gamers and misogynists are the same group. And the gamers claim widespread extortion and corruption throughout the game press has prevented them from addressing the core of the issue (from the gamers perspective). The break downs go on and on.
Here's my perspective. I don't know the women who kicked this off. Zoe Quinn is not a name known to me, nor is her work in any way important to me. Nor are the names of the other women being bounced around. Due to that irrelevance concerning thier work, I don't care about the truth of the allegations that she slept with people to get better game reviews. Given my complete lack of knowledge of the game in question, if true it didn't work very well. And if not true, then I still don't care about her game. The allegations have no impact beyond the question of impropriety in game reviews. All that matters about Zoe Quinn is that she and the other women concerned in this thing have been harassed far more than is even remotely reasonable. Even if the absolute worst of their critics claims are true, the personal attacks on them are far beyond acceptable.
Moving on the game "journalists". Quite frankly, the obvious collusion in the coordinated response they provided claiming that gamers are dead and don't matter anymore is disgusting, incorrect, and more importantly completely lacking in vision. Again, outside of this particular issue, game "journalists" have mishandled their jobs. They should behave as impartial critics of games and community. Instead, they often act as shills for triple A titles and wildly inflate reviews based on the kickback received. This has come up before, and will come up again. They get away with it by claiming that their articles are actually opinion pieces, and as such not subject to impartiality. That is true, but it's also reprehensible. In any effect, the rise of twitch and youtube reviews and 'let's play' videos has provided the informed with much better sources of review. In ten years, the game "journalist" will be dead.
Now, onto the feminists. Valid points raised. Many games have issues with misogynistic view points. But, the more temperate members run into the same issue as the gamers. The extreme sections of the discussion ruin it for the rest of you. Cherry picking data, ignoring critism, and claiming that "every single person who self identifies as a gamer is a rapist is disguise". That just hurts the idea, and makes people defensive who might otherwise support you. And, same as the misogynists, the act of attacking people and their livelihood simply for them not agreeing with you is reprehensible. The only good thing I can say is that so far, I haven't heard of feminists that have gone quite as far as the 4chan assholes have. I'm not sure I'd take that as a compliment if I were an "normal" member of the movement.
Finally... the gamers. Quite frankly, we're not blameless here. A large portion of gamers went along for the pitchfork ride in the beginning. Even those that backed off are still occasionally being pulled into the conversation. You have concerns with journalists? Ignore them and don't support those sites anymore. Trust me, the profession is dying and they know it. Issues with the feminists? accept that there is some level of truth to their claims, but ignore the vitriol. And the asshole misogynists? Don't help them by allowing them to co opt your views. Instead, as gamers, we should remember that we only have a single mind on one topic: we love to play games.
We don't agree on which games, or why, or even how much we do it. We just enjoy games. And this issue, with all of it's noise and hype is nothing. It's not important, and the people involved with fade away. Some because they're not relevant anymore. Some because they'll get bored with yelling into the wind. And at the end of the day, we'll all go back to pounding our controllers and keyboards, doing what we love to do. In fact, the sooner more of us do that instead of screaming at each other, the better off we'll all be.
In my life, the change in my perception the police has been palatable. Maybe part of that is movement from a rural community to a suburb. Maybe some of it is a factor of growing up and noticing things differently as we age. Maybe some of it is the proliferation of video evidence of things that were previously hearsay.
The police stereotypes of bullies lording power over others in an effort to maintain high school feelings of adequacy seem all too real. Those that seek the profession seem more interested in the authority and respect than the ability to protect and serve.
The common retort is that the bullies like that are the bad apples, or that the situation is never as black and white as the videos constantly make it appear. Those are both lies. Even if you assume 1% of cops are 'bad apples', the other 99% spend a lot of time covering up for them. Far too often, death by cop is ruled to be accidental or justified even when it's obviously not. Those investigations are handled by other cops in internal affairs, and the Blue Code bias is clear. Even in rare cases when the officer is found responsible, they are given slaps on the wrist while the department pays hush money settlements to the victims.
The single cop idea fails even faster when you consider that the scope of police disregard is far greater than that. While one cop can shoot a teen with flimsy justification, entire squads of police regularly bust in to homes to perform no-knock searches that have repeatedly ended with injuries and deaths of both home owners, and pets. Departments claim no culpability when they throw a flash-bang into the crib of a 3 month old infant causing it life threatening injuries.
Or on a larger scale the degree that police departments seize property on the basis that it was drug related, and use the sales of that property to fund their own expansion of power. Last year Philly seized 5.8 million dollars of property from owners, most of whom were unable to get through the labyrinthine red tape to recover it before it was sold. Most of it was also seized without any charges being filed, let alone a conviction received. In areas of the south, cops prowl the southbound lanes of highways hoping to seize drug money returning to Florida, while ignoring the drug shipments in the north lanes because the money is easier for them to seize and use. And they don't care if normal people get their legitimate money seized in the process.
Every time police departments get a new tool or toy, they want to use it. They have license plate cameras tracking your movements around town. They have devices to wiretap cell phone calls by hijacking them. They have armored cars and flak vests on par with Iraqi invasion troops. They want the right to search everyone at any time for any reason. Look to Arizona and its 'papers please' view of immigrants. Or New York's stop and frisk policy. They fight tooth and nail to use those things even when it's obvious they're racist, non-productive, or blatant violations of the 4th amendment.
Even the so called 'good ones' have a very serious hypocrisy when it comes to the use of force. They tell us they support the ACLU and want people to report 'bad cops' so they can be taken off the force. But within paragraphs, the story from that same person moves to demands that the citizenry doesn't challenge his authority, or demand to exercise their rights. To quote the douche: 'If you don't want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. [...] Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to cooperate for that long?' In the space of a page of text, his support for the rights of citizens vanishes into a demand that your surrender your rights for a few minutes, just to make it easier on yourself.
It's not a bad cop. It's not even a thousand bad cops. It's a bad system. Like spitting in the soup spoils the entire batch, the entire system of police in this country is rotten. At this point, it's not even a single glob of spit in the pot anymore. In my eye, there are no 'good cops' anymore. Some are better than others, but in the end, they are marching in lockstep with the rest of the Stasi.
Guilt by stereotype has become their standard, so I will judge them by it. I treat them with the same suspicion they would a gang member in the ghetto. I don't think they're driving around to serve or protect. They're here to inflate their egos, enforce their will, and exercise their authority.
I give them the trust and respect they have earned for themselves.