The new unspeakable N-word, apparently (the game's written by Sam Maggs too)
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (82)
sorted by:
Now you are changing terms on it. You shouldn't do that willy nilly because you think things are interchangeable, as there is a difference.
Now that we have changed goal posts to prostitution, you've brought in a dozen more moral and ethical arguments and used THEM to make your point for you.
So you have no problem with nepotism, you just have problems with nepotism. You know you don't have to defend this point.
Until there is a sexual angle, then its immoral and evil. You take one peek at some cleavage and suddenly the just righteousness is instantly evil! And certainly there is zero moral qualms to be raised about the just and fairness of a society built on "whose blood are you." Never in history has that been the dominating factor in how its used over anything close to competency!
Of course, after you move the goal post and provide additional context on your thoughts on women's place suddenly a lot more questions end up answered. Your timeline of events needs some work though.
Bro.
No.
Stop.
I don't need your wall of text arguing linguistics.
Fuck right off with that.
I wrote my point, my point is clear, do not jumble it into nonsense that I did not say.
Apparently we do because you just keep changing what words mean to suit your point whenever you want.
I legitimately cannot understand your point because I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on what you mean and all I can get is "its bad when I say its bad, and good when I say its good."
That's why you have to be specific when you try and say "favors for business advancement" is both "just and righteous" this time, but this other time it should be illegal and immoral this other. Its linguistic because you are tripping over yourself in contradictions, and that's the first step to making a lick of sense of your run around point.
I've been consistent and my point was clear. You cannot understand or comprehend that I consider the issue of prostitution from a different moral and ethical foundation.
Sexual favors for profit and networking are not even close to being similar.
Exactly, its good when you say it is and bad when you say it isn't. You've explained nothing further other than "It just is okay?!" That's certainly consistent in a way.
You've also moved us back to networking instead of nepotism, which again is that linguistic bullshit that's kind of important because one is a lot different than the other despite being incredibly similar. You know, the same way trading sexual favors is a lot bigger to you than nepotism despite being the literal same otherwise.