61
Off Topic / Re: should marywana/pot/weed/cannabis/the drug be legal: the great debate topic
« on: April 05, 2015, 09:33:02 PM »
yep
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
62
Off Topic / Re: Alright, so can we talk about annoying SJWs for a second?
« on: April 05, 2015, 09:21:58 PM »Except you didn't present it that way. You didn't present it like "I think that people act like this because..." you just say "People act like this because..." There are parts where you add "I think" but often times throughout your post you didn't present it that way.Well I apologize for that then; what I say is merely my own opinion, I wouldn't like to think that just because I say things people assume I'm trying to assert it as fact. So from now on, and from everything in the past, what I say is simply my understanding of the given issue and my interpretation. Some things may be my understanding of facts or just my own speculation. But I'm not claiming to be any sort of expert, I just want people to understand that they don't have to be enemies. I thought that by providing my interpretation of how and why people act in certain ways, I could help to create more understanding on all sides
What do you mean "violent rape"? Is there any other kind? Rape is a form of violence, is it not?Yeah, maybe 'violent rape' wasn't the right word for it. With that phrase I refer to the sort of rape that is basically "someone gets abducted on the street and is loveual abused." For 'non-violent', I was thinking more along the lines of love without properly informed consent. As in, statutory rape is still rape. And by familial I don't simply mean incest, I mean more like child abuse - where the parent/sibling takes advantage of their position of power to coerce their children/sibling into love. As in, you can have incest without it being rape, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I simply meant that lots of rape occurs within the family or home setting, but our society has this image that it happens between strangers when you're walking down the street and get abducted or something. Anyway, I simply spoke about rape as an issue because I think that the SJWs are not in the wrong for talking about it. I used it as an example to support my original statement that SJWs have some good ideas and great motives.
By "familial" do you mean incest? I don't think incest is rape. I think non-consensual love is rape.
As for discrimination, it seems that people who don't feel discriminated against are much more resistant to the idea that maybe people who claim to be are telling the truth. As in, you say that just cause someone claims to be discriminated against doesn't mean they are. Of course this is true, but they deserve to be heard and their issues deserve to be investigated. Like you say, we should investigate the underlying cause. I totally agree
Your entire contribution is assuming you know what/how people think?Like I say, my contribution is my understanding of how people think based on how they act; it might not be right but it's just the conclusion I've come to from what I've said. As in, the whole point of my original post was my understanding of how people think, based on my own experiences. I think it's silly to frown upon "assuming" what other people think; we do that all the time and that's how we form opinions, for better or for worse. Trying to have an open mind and understand peoples opinions and their points of view is what empathy is - and that naturally involves some "assumptions" about how people feel or think.
Social justice is a force for good, people like this are a vocal minority. Do not let them sour an otherwise positive, essential movement.And totally, this is the bottom line. Not all "SJWs" are always going to be ignorant starfishs like the people in the OP (unless that's how you define SJWs vs. "people who support justice" in which case I've been using the phrase wrong this whole time.)
63
Modification Help / Re: Default SMG
« on: April 05, 2015, 08:09:52 PM »
looks pretty cool; I see that in the later versions you added a blockier octagonal grip - but I also see that you keep the old hyper-round grip. I think you should get rid of that too and replace it with another octagonal section
64
Off Topic / Re: Alright, so can we talk about annoying SJWs for a second?
« on: April 05, 2015, 08:05:53 PM »Quit assuming you know what and how everyone thinks.I don't really understand why you say that; it's my entire contribution. I'm trying to explain what I see as the underlying issue that causes this tension between SJWs and anti-SJWs. I presented my theory for why people will react in certain ways based on my observations - I don't see why you would frown upon that. I have friends that are SJWs and I have friends who hate SJWs and from these experiences I came to my conclusion. I'm presenting my own personal theory; you can disagree with it surely, but to tell me that I can't try to understand people's motives is sorta silly. I'm trying not to claim that I have any knowledge about how people think - this is just my theory based on what I've seen. Very often throughout my post I said "I think this is why". It's because I'm merely saying what I think, my opinions and my conclusions. I don't know why you would ask me to not do that
Also, a couple of times you asked me to give examples of racism or discrimination. Now, I'm not going to pretend I have any personal examples of this, but I would like to say that if someone feels as though they are being oppressed by their government, just telling them that they aren't is not really a solution. Some particular recent issues that people are discussing are racism/profiling by the police (Ferguson) and that anti-homo bill in Indiana. I'm not going to tell you that either of those are discrimination - that's really for you to decide for yourself - but people feel as though there is discrimination going on here and I don't know if it's my place to tell them that they are or aren't being discriminated against.
I'm pretty sure most people know what consent is and is not. The whole "teach men not to rape" thing is handicapped because rapists are still going to rape. They know it's morally wrong and against the law, but they do it anyway. It's like saying "don't tell me to lock my doors, teach people not to steal". Obviously, it's wrong to rape and obviously it's wrong to steal, but there are preemptive measures one can take to not be raped or stolen from. It's also assuming that men are already inclined to do that. It's like saying "teach black people not to steal".For the most part, on all of these issues, I agree with what you're saying. By "social ideas" about rape, I meant that people think of all rape as "violent rape" when a lot of it is spousal or familial aka not just some stranger in an alley. For example, having love with someone while they're intoxicated or otherwise impaired and unable to give informed consent is generally not considered rape by most people. And when SJWs come and say that this should be considered rape, and people get all up-in-arms about it, because they feel like they're being threatened. I'd like to reiterate that I'm not a SJW, I'm not an advocate for anything, but you're definitely right that there is this lack of emphasis by the SJW crowd on men's issues. I simply think that people need to be more open to understanding the other side of an issue and that maybe people should try to understand the motivations and intent of the SJWs. I find myself to be really moderate on issues like this; I understand why SJWs advocate for the things that they do but I also understand that it's annoying and completely ineffective.
I'm pretty sure most people know what constitutes consent. Like I said, rapists will still rape. Thieves will still steal. Murders will still murder.
What "social ideas"? You mean that everyone knows rape and loveual harassment/assault are bad? What kind of world do you think we live in? Have you ever met someone who didn't think rape and loveual harassment/assault were bad?
Actually, I do agree there is a problem with rape. Everyone views man-on-woman rape as horrible, but what about woman-on-man rape? Or man-on-man rape? In fact, men and women are raped at about the same rate (though the majority of male rape victims are from other men, but 38% of male rape victims report a female perpetrator), why aren't there campaigns to help them? Domestic violence happens to women and men at the same rate, why is there a Violence Against Men act? Where are the men's shelters? Oh yeah, that's right, it was shut down from lack of support and funding. I'd recommend watching this video on domestic violence. It's a speech by Erin Pizzey, who was one of if not the first person to open a domestic violence shelter.
What about the deafening silence on prison rape? Why has no one raised an issue with that? Where are the campaigns to stop it? Oh, that's because they're men and they're criminals. Rape is an appropriate punishment for prisoners, even people charged with minor drug offenses.
Yes, rape is terrible and a problem. No, it's not an epidemic. The actual statistic is about 1 in 500.
Edit: Altogether, yeah, you're right on basically every count here. I simply think it would be helpful if people would try to see the opposing side of this issue (and all other ones!) instead of just closing their mind and following a herd mentality (of course this goes both ways; what are the SJWs if not a herd?)
65
Off Topic / Re: Alright, so can we talk about annoying SJWs for a second?
« on: April 05, 2015, 05:04:07 PM »
Now, I don't know exactly what definition of social justice you guys want to use, but I'm going to stick with the one used by the Green Party because I think it works pretty well with the tumblr sjws we see.
Issues like women's rights (including reproductive rights), social and economic equality, violence and oppression, racial discrimination are ALL important to discuss. These are core issues to the social justice cause, and I do think that these are good discussions to have. People, on all sides, want women to have rights and they want to end oppression and discrimination. Obviously, the cause of social justice is good, as it really does aim to make people happier.
But I think that people are resistant to these ideas because of the accusatory tone which SJWs take when they talk about these things. As in, people want to end discrimination, but SJWs will talk to people as though they are personally the problem. So when I say "selfish reasons" I mean that people don't disagree with the social justice platform, but they simply feel that SJWs are attacking them or their way of life with what they say.
The first of these then that I think is important to talk about is women's rights. In lots of ways, most people (aka non-sjws) agree with most elements of this. BUT, people are resistant to discussion about the wage gap, discrimination and consent. For all three of these things, it's because people don't personally see them as a problem and as such don't understand the concern. That is to say, people who are not affected by these issues do not see that they are a problem. People think that because a problem does not affect them, it does not exist. Obviously, this is wrong, but it is totally fair. After all, many sjws don't want to address problems that don't personally affect them or whichever cause they choose to support. So this sort of thinking goes both ways, but it is definitely one thing that makes people not like social justice. Frankly, I don't know if the wage gap exists or not (I've seen plenty of evidence for both sides so I don't really have any reason to think one way or the other), but I do know that some people think that it's an issue. I do know, however, that many people are misinformed on the issues of consent and loveual education. That is, the social ideas that we have about loveual harassment and rape are still dangerous to many people, and many people don't want to talk about rape as an issue.
In a lot of ways, I think that people dislike social justice because they personally feel they are not a part of the problem. SJWs will say things like "1/6 of women are raped in their life" or something like that, and people (on both sides) will misinterpret that. First of all, obviously this statistic shows that rape is a huge and terrible problem. But SJWs who become afraid of men because of this are severely misguided. Regardless, some people will come to the conclusion from this that "men are dangerous". As such, non-sjws will find themselves personally attacked by what the sjws are saying. And this is where much of the animosity comes from. In reality, this statistic is a result of lacking loveual education and a terrible understanding of what actually constitutes rape. People are resistant to the idea that rape is more than just violent rape but actually refers to any love without consent. This is because people are afraid that they will be unjustly accused of rape. The problem then becomes that both sides are going to be arguing about an issue because they simply are not on the same page.
For the most part, people who are anti-social justice feel like they have to take this position to protect themselves. Statistics about rape and discrimination end up with people feeling guilty about something they did not take part in, which is why some people begin to assert that these are not issues. For example, just because you have not personally racially discriminated against someone, that doesn't mean racial discrimination does not exist.
All of these things mean that social justice is a noble goal to pursue. But I think that people lost sight of this (on both sides) when they end up having to defend themselves against perceived accusations. For example, the lady described in the OP is annoying and she is certainly in the wrong, but many people find issues with cultural appropriation. Now, I personally don't understand the problem with cultural appropriation, but if people think that it's wrong, that's their own deal. So the idea of her saying "You're wrong because you're appropriating!" is terrible and stuffty, because she's blocking off this conversation. Aggressive SJ warrioring is what turns people off from the discussion. But some people genuinely believe that cultural appropriation is bad and want to stop it, and I think that can be seen as a noble goal. However, since she went about it in such a stuffty way, that makes it seem like she's wrong and like she's simply being an starfish. So, I dunno, I feel like people want to hate on social justice because they feel like they are personally being held responsible. And I think this happens because dumbass social justice warriors will hold you responsible for something that isn't your fault. And this is how anti-sjws will end up defending racism and rape and stuff like that, not because anti-sjws want to defend it, but because sjws want to unfairly accuse people of being part of these issues.
Altogether, I don't really know what to say. I see both sides of the issue, but I do think that the ideas behind social justice are great. The problem becomes when people get obsessed about it and talk about it all the time. All that does is makes everyone feel unhappy, and it makes them look like an starfish. People like that live their entire life in this loving mire of unhappiness, because they think that "empathy" means "making people feel bad for issues they didn't cause and things they didn't do". But the ending of oppression and racism and loveism is a noble goal and I think, honestly, most people would agree with these things if they weren't made to feel responsible for things they didn't do.
Edit:
Issues like women's rights (including reproductive rights), social and economic equality, violence and oppression, racial discrimination are ALL important to discuss. These are core issues to the social justice cause, and I do think that these are good discussions to have. People, on all sides, want women to have rights and they want to end oppression and discrimination. Obviously, the cause of social justice is good, as it really does aim to make people happier.
But I think that people are resistant to these ideas because of the accusatory tone which SJWs take when they talk about these things. As in, people want to end discrimination, but SJWs will talk to people as though they are personally the problem. So when I say "selfish reasons" I mean that people don't disagree with the social justice platform, but they simply feel that SJWs are attacking them or their way of life with what they say.
The first of these then that I think is important to talk about is women's rights. In lots of ways, most people (aka non-sjws) agree with most elements of this. BUT, people are resistant to discussion about the wage gap, discrimination and consent. For all three of these things, it's because people don't personally see them as a problem and as such don't understand the concern. That is to say, people who are not affected by these issues do not see that they are a problem. People think that because a problem does not affect them, it does not exist. Obviously, this is wrong, but it is totally fair. After all, many sjws don't want to address problems that don't personally affect them or whichever cause they choose to support. So this sort of thinking goes both ways, but it is definitely one thing that makes people not like social justice. Frankly, I don't know if the wage gap exists or not (I've seen plenty of evidence for both sides so I don't really have any reason to think one way or the other), but I do know that some people think that it's an issue. I do know, however, that many people are misinformed on the issues of consent and loveual education. That is, the social ideas that we have about loveual harassment and rape are still dangerous to many people, and many people don't want to talk about rape as an issue.
In a lot of ways, I think that people dislike social justice because they personally feel they are not a part of the problem. SJWs will say things like "1/6 of women are raped in their life" or something like that, and people (on both sides) will misinterpret that. First of all, obviously this statistic shows that rape is a huge and terrible problem. But SJWs who become afraid of men because of this are severely misguided. Regardless, some people will come to the conclusion from this that "men are dangerous". As such, non-sjws will find themselves personally attacked by what the sjws are saying. And this is where much of the animosity comes from. In reality, this statistic is a result of lacking loveual education and a terrible understanding of what actually constitutes rape. People are resistant to the idea that rape is more than just violent rape but actually refers to any love without consent. This is because people are afraid that they will be unjustly accused of rape. The problem then becomes that both sides are going to be arguing about an issue because they simply are not on the same page.
For the most part, people who are anti-social justice feel like they have to take this position to protect themselves. Statistics about rape and discrimination end up with people feeling guilty about something they did not take part in, which is why some people begin to assert that these are not issues. For example, just because you have not personally racially discriminated against someone, that doesn't mean racial discrimination does not exist.
All of these things mean that social justice is a noble goal to pursue. But I think that people lost sight of this (on both sides) when they end up having to defend themselves against perceived accusations. For example, the lady described in the OP is annoying and she is certainly in the wrong, but many people find issues with cultural appropriation. Now, I personally don't understand the problem with cultural appropriation, but if people think that it's wrong, that's their own deal. So the idea of her saying "You're wrong because you're appropriating!" is terrible and stuffty, because she's blocking off this conversation. Aggressive SJ warrioring is what turns people off from the discussion. But some people genuinely believe that cultural appropriation is bad and want to stop it, and I think that can be seen as a noble goal. However, since she went about it in such a stuffty way, that makes it seem like she's wrong and like she's simply being an starfish. So, I dunno, I feel like people want to hate on social justice because they feel like they are personally being held responsible. And I think this happens because dumbass social justice warriors will hold you responsible for something that isn't your fault. And this is how anti-sjws will end up defending racism and rape and stuff like that, not because anti-sjws want to defend it, but because sjws want to unfairly accuse people of being part of these issues.
Altogether, I don't really know what to say. I see both sides of the issue, but I do think that the ideas behind social justice are great. The problem becomes when people get obsessed about it and talk about it all the time. All that does is makes everyone feel unhappy, and it makes them look like an starfish. People like that live their entire life in this loving mire of unhappiness, because they think that "empathy" means "making people feel bad for issues they didn't cause and things they didn't do". But the ending of oppression and racism and loveism is a noble goal and I think, honestly, most people would agree with these things if they weren't made to feel responsible for things they didn't do.
Edit:
Just because someone is offended doesn't mean they're right. Especially if they're offended about something that doesn't directly have an effect on them.You're right, but I don't see so much what you're saying. Some people think that cultural appropriation is a problem, it doesn't have to affect them. Similarly, just because someone's annoying doesn't make them wrong.
66
Off Topic / Re: Alright, so can we talk about annoying SJWs for a second?
« on: April 05, 2015, 04:23:06 PM »About cultural appropriation? HAH. HAHAh. noWell, I don't know so much about that, but in general the whole cause of social justice is pretty good and I think that people are mostly resistant to it for fairly selfish reasons
67
Off Topic / Re: Alright, so can we talk about annoying SJWs for a second?
« on: April 05, 2015, 04:01:03 PM »
Like, it's 100% annoying but also they're like right at least 80% of the time yo
68
Creativity / Re: The new and improved 3D model topic!
« on: April 05, 2015, 02:47:41 PM »70
Off Topic / Re: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch
« on: April 03, 2015, 09:36:14 PM »71
Creativity / Re: The new and improved 3D model topic!
« on: March 24, 2015, 09:35:58 PM »
Ooh, that's pretty, I like it :D
72
Off Topic / Re: which forumers would you want on your zombie apoc team
« on: March 22, 2015, 12:21:18 PM »
I'd say
Nullable
Munk
Filipe
Khain
Makanix
Nullable
Munk
Filipe
Khain
Makanix
73
Off Topic / Re: what to watch with netflix?
« on: March 21, 2015, 04:56:18 PM »
These first 6 are VITAL; Listed in order of importance
Lost
Psych
Breaking Bad
Dexter
Walking Dead
Bates Motel
These next ones are all really great as well; no particular order
How I Met Your Mother
The Office
Heroes
Jericho
Lie to Me
Doctor Who
Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood
Mad Men
Sherlock
Twin Peaks
Alfred Hitchrooster Presents
Lost
Psych
Breaking Bad
Dexter
Walking Dead
Bates Motel
These next ones are all really great as well; no particular order
How I Met Your Mother
The Office
Heroes
Jericho
Lie to Me
Doctor Who
Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood
Mad Men
Sherlock
Twin Peaks
Alfred Hitchrooster Presents
74
Creativity / Re: The new and improved 3D model topic!
« on: March 18, 2015, 10:53:34 PM »
I'd say they belong here
Let's see 'em :D
Let's see 'em :D
75
Creativity / Re: The new and improved 3D model topic!
« on: March 18, 2015, 07:33:27 PM »
Yeah, it really is a pain in Milkshape but its definitely worth it (for something that deserves it of course ;D)