>digging up a month old post

Damn that's pathetic, even if it's an elaborate "troll". Here's that crumb off attention you were after, you're not getting another.

Just call it what it is and always has been: Blaxploitation. It's tokenism all over again with a new coat of paint to make it socially acceptable again. Is there really all that much different between Blackula and Muh Historical Black Samurai? All it's doing is trying to pander to minorities and faux "cultured" whites.

And the new spin is no different between the "Colored People" vs "People of Color" crap. It's the same fucking thing, but retards will never learn I guess.

I'll even be nice about that, and say that an actor doesn't need to be a fan of a role that they're going for. Doesn't always need to be like that for an actor to do a good job (though I think it certainly helps).

What is the much clearer issue is the fact that the role wasn't just about a successful and interesting character, it's that it was a vehicle, a carrier, to further her ideology first and foremost.

An actor doesn't necessarily need to be an enthusiast about what they're acting (though it certainly helps), but if they're using the roles they get as a means to an end? That shit is cancer no matter what their cause might be.

It's less that they're banned and more that they just moved on. Capaldi was a really good Doctor, but that only goes so far with companions like Clara and "Bill". They were already losing ground back then and viewing numbers readily back that up. Then they went with Chibnall and anyone who stuck around after the first season* of Whittaker was gone by the end of her second. They stopped watching. They moved on. Because it was clear that the show didn't respect them as fans, so why should they keep watching something that they weren't enjoying?

*Reminder that Whittaker's first season includes: Her pilot episode which was okay at best, an anti-knife PSA mid-episode, racism but now it's time racism, Muh Trump, and a pregnant man. All in that order. As the first 5 episodes. And they wonder why people turned it off? Why they stopped watching? It's clear they don't want fans to watch the show. So we stopped watching.

Fans made their opinion known, it was ignored, so the fans ignored the show in return. It's that simple.

I can get the catharsis of it, I guess. It's just so damn cringey to post, share and expect praise for it online. Like yeah, go out and break something. I get it. It feels good to break shit. But you're not special for it, and having a breakdown over it isn't healthy, and double so trying to gain "muh validation" for doing so.

I swear, so many people want to be adults and yet none of them can escape the very immature pursuit of validation.

They don't know what any words mean beyond "this is positive/negative". That's why they use so many terms in a pejorative sense with no understanding of the greater meaning, associations, or connotations such words have and how they might better describe themselves. A really good example of this is Fascist, one which I believe stems from academic socialists in many years gone by that felt threatened by the initial rise of fascism since it was explicitly born from socialists that were fed up with the ineffectual nature of socialism. AKA Fascism isn't an enemy of socialism, it's a competitor to socialism and that's the threat that socialists are worried about.

Finally, an initiative to help bring equality to the workplace injury statistics!

What's annoying is the people that then go on to say shit like "but you're denying yourself a good game" and it's just so weird because my response is almost always "and?". And they can't comprehend that you're fine with passing up on a good game.

There are so many good games out there, why do I need to spend time with this specific one? Because you were dumb enough to part ways with your money for a pozzed game that's not as terrible as other pozzed trash? Need to convince others to share in your bad spending habits? Somehow they see it as some kind of loss that you play one of your other games, and probably one that's in your backlog, than mindlessly shill for [CURRENT PRODUCT].

Hades 2 is probably fine. If I played it, I would probably enjoy it. But I lose nothing by not playing it and not supporting the media narrative surrounding it regarding "muh representation", nor supporting the idea of pushing this historical/mythical revisionism. I lose nothing by spending that time on another game that I know I'll enjoy, either by replaying or going through my backlog. I lose nothing by not playing this game and spending time doing literally anything else either.

This could be the best game I play this year, and I'd still lose nothing by not playing it. And there are people out there who cannot comprehend that.

Demotions in cases like these are essentially a message for "don't get caught next time", and not a case that they actually did the wrong thing.

You don't leave someone in a position of power if they truly did something wrong.

And there are still people who think the system can be reformed.

"Pretending" to be a retard only results in people seeing you as a retard. So trying to pull these "snippy" responses as if you're actually some troll doesn't really do much when it comes AFTER the point where you can't actually respond to what has been said, and only occurs because you're getting offended at being treated like the toddler you are.

Or in other words, you go right ahead and shut it all down because you got your feelings hurt. Because that's all you can do at this point. You have nothing left to say other than quips. You have no more attempts at gotchas. You're just going to be abrasive an pretend like people getting mildly annoyed with some asperger's sufferer is some form of "winning". Again, censors are always the same. You pull out bunk "gotchas" or stupid little appeals, and then when you make no ground you devolve into behaving like an idiot as if it was some massive troll all along.

Congratulations, you've wasted your time, I've stood my ground, and you convinced nobody. You accomplished literally nothing. Enjoy trying to get in some last word, it won't change a thing and you'll still be a bootlicker at the end of the day, begging for more and more authoritarianism to comfort to your delicate sensibilities.

Decade? Have you not been paying attention? This shit became obvious after around 2007 when the internet became mass accessible to the general public, in large part due to the vastly increased adoption of smartphones and their internet capabilities. And since then, there has been a concerted effort to sanitise the internet and make it as advertiser friendly as possible, which means that spaces need to be made as sterilised and controlled as possible.

It's not the past 10 years. It's closer to the past 20.

That too is wrong. I agree that it's not exactly the best line to draw, but drawing any line at this stage is better than nothing. And no, taking the scraps of this shitshow isn't going to lead to any sort of "winning", but I'd still prefer it to unabashed and continual losing over and over and over.

God you're an obtuse spastic.

You really are desperate to try and find a way to justify or rationalise that you're fine with censorship. You're so intent on thinking you're a good person but cannot reconcile with the reality that you're fine with immoral shit solely because of your own apathy.

But again, to hold your hand because you're that low and infantile: Violation, no. Immoral to assert your delicate sensibilities against another person? Definitely.

Now go and cry about some sort of hypocrisy of "self censorship" because I'm actually going to tell you to go fuck yourself and that you should stop talking on these topics. Stick to things you can handle. Like what's your favourite colour, or how many crayons you can shove up your nose.

Are you really going to be that disingenuous? Do you really think that "not liking something" is on par with active removal of content?

What's more is that bullshit isn't new. You're appealing to the bandwagon. The idea that if some arbitrary masses don't like something, then changing it isn't actually censorship, it's just appeasing to the audience. But the reality is that self-censorship is still censorship, and it's been happening for centuries. This shit is no different from retards that would bitch about an episode of Lassie because it included footage of an animal birth.

Censors are always the same. It doesn't matter what you're bitching about, it doesn't matter what "side" you're on. You ultimately share the same motivations and defences that have been widely condemned, and condemned for good reason. The only difference now is it's ideologically motivated by a belief you think you can co-exist with, despite clear and ever-present shift that has undeniably been going on for the past 50 years at least.

So, to answer your question, no. Not liking something is not an infringement. But that has nothing to do with anything, and unless you're wilfully brain-damaged, you know that.

I've never run into a stranger in the woods and not had it turn into a good time.

Ahh, but was it a good time for them? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Well there is the little inconvenience that feminists often overlook that men are the vast majority of victims in all violent crimes. The only subcategory that women are the majority of victims in is in sexual crimes, and those studies can wildly vary in statistics from study to study based on biases.

But yeah, out on the street, men are more likely to be a victim than a woman. But that fact isn't fearmongering, so it doesn't get shared around.

Then buy a gun. Learn to use it. Learn to defend yourself with a real equaliser.

Or better yet, take responsibility for your own safety. We don't make endless campaigns about how most non-natural, non-disease deaths are men, because most of those are caused by some dumbfuck being a dumbfuck. So don't be a dumbfuck and let yourself be victimised.

Frankly, this is just further sanitisation of reality. The harsh reality of the world is violence. The safety we face is nothing more than a tiny, insignificant blip in the history of humanity. And for some reason, we focus on this little blip to try and justify people being wilfully defenceless. Fuck that. And this isn't saying you should hope to shoot someone who would assault you. You shouldn't want to do that. But you need to be prepared for it. Because at the end of the day, your life is worth more than some scumbag that would attack you unprovoked.

Snippy remark instead of any point? Yeah, that sounds about right.

Who? Who are these giants you're tilting at? Linehan isn't here. Nobody even brought him up except yourself. You're getting angry at people that aren't here.

You wanna talk about Linehan, you go right ahead. But don't pretend there's some massive wave of support for him here just because people rightfully find trannies revolting. You're unironically using a "hitler ate sugar" mentality to try and suggest that being sick and tired of trannies is somehow related to Graham Linehan for no reason at all.

There are giants out there. But they're not here. You're tilting at windmills here.

No, I'll rightfully blame the fucking entryists that shifted market demands.

To bring it around to gaming, it's why I hated and still hate the shift to public servers as the default. I remember when privately owned was the default, and everyone had their own little corner. Skinheads had their shithole, leftists their own, furries their own, etc. Then it all shifted and tried to put all those groups and many more all together. There was a golden age of online gaming, rife with guilds and clans and clubs. And while there were plenty that didn't get along, you could always find a place where you would get along with others.

Those days are dead. And fuck if it isn't missed. All because stupid fucking tourists/entryists weren't happy having to find/make their own little corner. If there has been one thing that I've learned over the years, it's the explicit importance of gatekeeping, and that anyone who bitches about it is either criminally ignorant or deservedly to be put on the other side of the gate.

Let's not also forget, adult women have zero autonomy of their own when compared to men. That's why they bring up that she's 20, because in their mind, a 20 year is still not an adult and therefore is incapable of making her own decisions.

Then again, adult women not being able to make their own decisions is like a foundational aspect of Feminist rhetoric, so I guess that checks out for consistency on their part.

You forget that there is and always has been two standards.

Remember, these are the people who unironically believe that there are no bad tactics, only bad targets. They're fine with paid protestors when they're on their side. The minute someone else uses paid protestors, then it's a problem.

Selling out was their biggest failure. They never needed a big budget. They needed to remain independent. But then again, they invited that woke in even before they sold out, so it's no surpise.