The New Generation of Gamer is Overly-Sensitive

  • 103 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#51 Edited by Jag85 (4279 posts) -

@mark321123 said:

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Either you're not old enough to remember Mortal Kombat when it first came out, or must be wearing rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. When games like Mortal Kombat and Doom first came out, they kicked off huge storms of controversy, with plenty of attempts to ban violent video games. Nowadays, most people wouldn't bat an eye-lid at ultra-violent video games like GTA and COD. If anything, the complete opposite has happened: Modern gamers have become increasingly desensitized to violence.

#52 Edited by Jacanuk (3850 posts) -

@Jag85 said:

@mark321123 said:

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Either you're not old enough to remember Mortal Kombat when it first came out, or must be wearing rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. When games like Mortal Kombat and Doom first came out, they kicked off huge storms of controversy, with plenty of attempts to ban violent video games. Nowadays, most people wouldn't bat an eye-lid at ultra-violent video games like GTA and COD. If anything, the complete opposite has happened: Modern gamers have become increasingly desensitized to violence.

I take it you're from the uk, so what uproar was there? i know that in the US as always some congress and republican had a huge cry about it and wanted it banned. Pretty much like the conservatives still do today in the us.

But in europe, i don't recall there being any debate about violence and games back then, there might have been some chronicles and editorial in the more liberal media and of course straight after the horrible child murder in the uk committed by those two boys.

#53 Edited by Jag85 (4279 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Jag85 said:

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Either you're not old enough to remember Mortal Kombat when it first came out, or must be wearing rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. When games like Mortal Kombat and Doom first came out, they kicked off huge storms of controversy, with plenty of attempts to ban violent video games. Nowadays, most people wouldn't bat an eye-lid at ultra-violent video games like GTA and COD. If anything, the complete opposite has happened: Modern gamers have become increasingly desensitized to violence.

I take it you're from the uk, so what uproar was there? i know that in the US as always some congress and republican had a huge cry about it and wanted it banned. Pretty much like the conservatives still do today in the us.

But in europe, i don't recall there being any debate about violence and games back then, there might have been some chronicles and editorial in the more liberal media and of course straight after the horrible child murder in the uk committed by those two boys.

There was controversy surrounding various games at various times in the UK as well. In 1981, Space Invaders came close to being banned in parliament. In 1987, Barbarian: The Ultimate Warrior was controversial for its "sexist" cover art depicting a bikini-clad woman (something which most people would not consider "sexist" today). A few examples I remember from the 90's include debate surrounding the violence in games like Mortal Kombat and Doom (at least in the press, but not sure if it was ever taken to parliament), censorship of violence in the original Resident Evil, the original GTA causing considerable controversy in the press (even before GTA3), Carmageddon being temporarily banned, etc. And then of course there's the Manhunt-inspired murder which kicked off a huge storm of controversy in the early 2000's.

It was more of a worldwide phenomenon rather than a US-specific one. There was plenty of opposition to violent and sexual content in Europe, just as there had been in America, though maybe not to the same extent as America... except in Germany, which I heard was stricter than most other countries.

#54 Edited by mark321123 (246 posts) -

@Jag85 said:

@mark321123 said:

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Either you're not old enough to remember Mortal Kombat when it first came out, or must be wearing rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. When games like Mortal Kombat and Doom first came out, they kicked off huge storms of controversy, with plenty of attempts to ban violent video games. Nowadays, most people wouldn't bat an eye-lid at ultra-violent video games like GTA and COD. If anything, the complete opposite has happened: Modern gamers have become increasingly desensitized to violence.

That was not GAMERS that complained about the violence back then, it was the politicians.

#55 Edited by Jag85 (4279 posts) -

@mark321123 said:

That was not GAMERS that complained about the violence back then, it was the politicians.

The kind of violence we find in games today is a different ball park from older 16-bit games. In the 16-bit era, we didn't have GTA-style open-world games where you could mass-murder innocent civilians at will in broad daylight and get away with it with a slap on the wrist... That's the kind of extreme violence that gamers today might find distasteful, not the kind of violence you'd find in older 16-bit games like Doom or Mortal Kombat. Even then, there were plenty of gamers who agreed that Mortal Kombat is not suitable for younger kids and that there should be some sort of regulation to prevent younger kids from playing it, eventually leading to the ESRB rating system.

Also, that 1987 sexism controversy I referred to above, surrounding the bikini-clad woman on the cover of Barbarian: The Ultimate Warrior (which, like I said above, would be considered tame and definitely not sexist by today's standards), was mainly coming from gamers sending complaints to game magazines, not from politicians. Also, there have been plenty of online threads from the 16-bit era debating sexism in video games, such as this thread or this thread. Back then, there were plenty of gamers complaining about things like sexist/racial stereotypes, lack of female protagonists, and damsels in distress, along with gamers complaining about political correctness. This whole "sexism in video games" debate isn't something invented by Anita Sarkeesian, but it has been going on as far back as the 80's, even as early as Pac-Man, which was created to be more friendly for female audiences in a male-dominated industry. And because of this attempt to reach out to a wider audience, Pac-Man went on to become the highest-grossing game of all time.

#56 Posted by sukraj (21797 posts) -
#57 Posted by Mesomorphin (807 posts) -

@sukraj said:

@xeno_ghost said:

@mesomorphin: alright mate relax :P

he needs to take a chill pill.

Dude, chill man haha. My comment was more humorous than it was aggressive lol

#58 Posted by mark321123 (246 posts) -

@Jag85: There weren't "plenty" of gamers complaining back then. The volume of complaints from the '16-bit era,' as you call it, has increased ten-fold in the current era. Plus, I reiterate, those in the gaming community that share these views are in the minority. Are you one of these gamers?

#59 Edited by Jag85 (4279 posts) -

@mark321123 said:

@Jag85: There weren't "plenty" of gamers complaining back then. The volume of complaints from the '16-bit era,' as you call it, has increased ten-fold in the current era. Plus, I reiterate, those in the gaming community that share these views are in the minority. Are you one of these gamers?

That means nothing. The number of gamers with internet access has increased a hundred-fold (or a thousand-fold) since then, so of course the volume of complaints will increase along with it.

And if the kind of gamer you're referring to (by which I assume you mean "liberals") is just a minority, then why did your opening post present this minority as if they represent an entire generation of gamers?

#61 Edited by mark321123 (246 posts) -

@Jag85: First of all, - for the record - I never aligned the proponents of these issues with ANY political affiliation - you're the one that has identified them as "liberals." Now, if you had read the whole thread or at least my posts, you would have realized that I first had the notion that this generation of gamers were becoming super sensitive, but because of the responses in this forum, that notion has changed. It seems that it is mostly journalists that are spearheading the complaints.

#62 Edited by jsmoke03 (12600 posts) -

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

yea when you were a kid...no one cared about socio political content in video games.

but then we all grew up.....

#63 Edited by mark321123 (246 posts) -

@jsmoke03 said:

@mark321123 said:

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

yea when you were a kid...no one cared about socio political content in video games.

but then we all grew up.....

Who is "we all"?

#64 Posted by Dom_Hawk_basic (404 posts) -

@juboner:

I get the joke, but in seriousness I doubt this is the case. I'm from Vermont one of the most socially liberal states in the union. where I went to a liberal college, trust me you have to be pre-disposed.

#65 Edited by HailtotheQueen (156 posts) -

Yeah, gamers are really over-sensitive.

Someone makes the slightest criticism of their hobby or community and they start getting really defensive.

LOL This pretty much sums up the thread. Overly sensitive gamers complaining about other gamers being overly-sensitive.

#66 Edited by wiouds (5014 posts) -

@PannicAtack said:

@mark321123 said:

@PannicAtack: Was Bioware guilted into doing that? Or did they do it of their own volition?

They did it of their own volition and dudebros bitched because it made them uncomfortable and insecure.

It is not because it was in the games but the way they go about it. Bioware is being a bit of an an a$$ and worse when people are bring that up then people start to bitched about it.

#67 Posted by CorporateCowboy (11 posts) -

Why the surprise? Gaming is growing, it's growing fast and with that you'll, inevitably, end up having some overly sensitive people on board. Those who claim the moral high ground as their domain whilst easily being duped into getting into an all out insult-fest over social media channels based on hearsay or assumptions - the Assassins Creed Unity controversy is a prime example for such behavior.

#68 Posted by Senor_Kami (8291 posts) -

I totally disagree. I think games press like to raise a stink about this stuff but most gamers could give two shits about this stuff. Most of these are issues that only play to us... the like 100K people on message boards who are so hardcore about games that it is a major function of our lives and we listen to podcasts and visit multiple sites daily just to stay up on it. The other like hundred million people playing games though...

#69 Edited by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

I totally disagree. I think games press like to raise a stink about this stuff but most gamers could give two shits about this stuff. Most of these are issues that only play to us... the like 100K people on message boards who are so hardcore about games that it is a major function of our lives and we listen to podcasts and visit multiple sites daily just to stay up on it. The other like hundred million people playing games though...

I suspect most people care, but most don't care enough to complain. If bored or repulsed, most people simply move on to stuff that interests them.

Its also worth keeping in mind that most vocal gamers online are traditionalists who want things to stay the same as they always have. That is a futile hope because the gaming industry has never held still (in the 38 years I've been gaming a lot of genres and companies have risen and fallen) and nowadays the market is more diverse than ever. Also, the market is more competitive than ever, with a plethora of quality games on offer and a shrinking number of franchises/games taking a bigger chunk of retail earnings (the mid-tier died like flies last gen and the dying is continuing this gen).

http://www.joystiq.com/2014/07/02/report-murdered-soul-suspect-developer-airtight-games-closes/

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/tony-hawk-s-dev-neversoft-closes-doors/0135247?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mcvuk%2Fstream+(MCV%3A+Home+Stream)

Developers who sit atop megafranchises like CoD and GTA can and should keep doing what they are doing, a lot of others are listening very carefully to anyone who they feel might give them advice which could help them make a commercially successful game.

#70 Posted by AGeekyLink (55 posts) -

Gamers old enough to have played Mortal Kombat when it first came out were not types who would whine about the socio-political content in videogames. It seems that gamers these days - at least the ones who get paid to review games for magazines and websites -are overly-sensitive to violence and sexism in games. Is this a new trend? Do they simply make these statements to seem intelligent? Or are gamers truly that offended by today's games?

It's not just games. It's society who has changed.

#71 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

Awesome, a thread that is masking the complaint of others complaining about something they don't like under the guise of gamers are overly sensitive. Not surprised by the appearance of the usual suspects.

#72 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

Definitely not enough boobs in games. And whenever there is boobs in games, the professional journalists look down on it like it's a negative aspect of the game. I wish we could actually see a journalist look at some nudity and sex in a game and just admit it was hot and sexy. That it was a pleasant bit of eye candy and the jiggle physics were a joy to stare at. Stop being so afraid of being called sexist or a pervert. Stop trying to mentally castrate yourself. Enjoy it. You know you want to. Just let yourselves enjoy it.

I guess you would be fine if there were more crotch shots and when male players jump around their junk jiggle. In fact we need more bulges, there simply not enough. We have to stop being so afraid and let the bugle grow.

#73 Posted by juboner (353 posts) -

@Dom_Hawk_basic: No the many liberal colleges and professors has an effect on young people. There is just too much of it not to have an effect on society. Now if you are pre disposed to conservative values you stand a chance if thats what you mean.

#74 Posted by Mercuria1_King (276 posts) -

Nice rant bro.

#75 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

yes, too many people in the world today are mentally weak, oversensitive and get offended at the drop of a hat.

#76 Posted by Dom_Hawk_basic (404 posts) -

@juboner:

perhaps. I believe that one should keep an open mind to both sides of the fence and realize that most of the time the truth lies somewhere in the middle. That, and most politicans are crooks :) Look at leeland Yee, the man was complaining about game violence yet he was linked to gun smuggling. Wasn't that the irony of the decade.

#77 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

yes, too many people in the world today are mentally weak, oversensitive and get offended at the drop of a hat.

Mentally weak? It seems like people don't like to be acknowledge that their behavior can have negative effects on others and is unwilling to face these realities. This is the reason the "man up" was invented. Its people (mainly guys) who are unable to handle a situation that is most likely emotional. Is it so hard to face the possibility that your behavior is actually negative?

#78 Posted by juboner (353 posts) -

@Dom_Hawk_basic: True their are crooked people on both sides but conservative ideals are what made this country great to begin with. Liberalism is anti American and hides behind human good, socialism never works and is evil.

#79 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@juboner said:

@Dom_Hawk_basic: True their are crooked people on both sides but conservative ideals are what made this country great to begin with. Liberalism is anti American and hides behind human good, socialism never works and is evil.

That makes no sense.

#80 Posted by juboner (353 posts) -

@Pedro: It works for the ones in power but it limits the peoples freedoms and choice.

#81 Posted by wiouds (5014 posts) -

@Pedro said:

@udubdawgz1 said:

yes, too many people in the world today are mentally weak, oversensitive and get offended at the drop of a hat.

Mentally weak? It seems like people don't like to be acknowledge that their behavior can have negative effects on others and is unwilling to face these realities. This is the reason the "man up" was invented. Its people (mainly guys) who are unable to handle a situation that is most likely emotional. Is it so hard to face the possibility that your behavior is actually negative?

It seem to some that you are guilty at the start. They do not have an female assassin in one game from a franchise and they are automatically label as being sexist.

#82 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@Pedro: the point, pedro, is that people, when, feeling oh so negatively effected need to keep it to themselves and deal with it themselves and grow mentally stronger as they... keep and deal with it themselves.

so what if someone's behavior is "negative" and i am impacted by hurt of my whittle feewings? i, MAN UP and deal with it appropriately.

i don't, however, say, something foolish like, oh, my whittle feewings were hurt and i need to let everyone know that my sensitivities were touched.

btw, yes, modern technology, facebook, insta, etc. are part of the problem.

#83 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@juboner said:

@Pedro: It works for the ones in power but it limits the peoples freedoms and choice.

Have taken a look at the wonderful execution of democracy as of late? The idea that one is better than the other is propaganda and nothing more. Freedom of choice is nothing more than a nifty catch phrase that is thrown around meaninglessly.

@Pedro: the point, pedro, is that people, when, feeling oh so negatively effected need to keep it to themselves and deal with it themselves and grow mentally stronger as they... keep and deal with it themselves.

so what if someone's behavior is "negative" and i am impacted by hurt of my whittle feewings? i, MAN UP and deal with it appropriately.

i don't, however, say, something foolish like, oh, my whittle feewings were hurt and i need to let everyone know that my sensitivities were touched.

btw, yes, modern technology, facebook, insta, etc. are part of the problem.

The real deal is that you don't like these people's concerns and because you don't like it you boil it down to some childish complaint when the real problem is that you simply don't want to address the issue. Addressing issues take time and mental power which most are just to lazy to endure. The issue is there and people would vocalize the issue whether you like it or not. You are complaining about these people "whittle feewings" when at the same time your "whittle feewings" are troubled when others voice complaints or bring attention to specific issues. It is simply selfishness. If any of these issues that people voice their concern about you can relate to or directly affected you, I am 100% sure that you would be expressing your "whittle feewings". If people didn't express their "whittle feewings" many of the liberties and luxuries that you enjoy today would not exist. So you can go ahead pretend to bottle up your "feewings" but in the end we still have to deal with because it would express itself in some form or the other.

#84 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@Pedro: lol, addressing the horde of childish complaints from mentally weak individuals is ez and hardly time-consuming. you see, i am truly talking about how weak one's mind must be in order to get upset and offended at trivial and childish and worthless aspects of life and then get to the point where they publicize their weakness, i mean, sensitivities.

not a day goes by, literally, where i am not forced to shake my head and/or laugh at some fool yapping on about some affront they feel happened to them and their need to let us all know.

hey, i know the solution: trophies for everyone and time-out.

#85 Posted by experience_fade (259 posts) -

@Pedro: lol, addressing the horde of childish complaints from mentally weak individuals is ez and hardly time-consuming. you see, i am truly talking about how weak one's mind must be in order to get upset and offended at trivial and childish and worthless aspects of life and then get to the point where they publicize their weakness, i mean, sensitivities.

not a day goes by, literally, where i am not forced to shake my head and/or laugh at some fool yapping on about some affront they feel happened to them and their need to let us all know.

hey, i know the solution: trophies for everyone and time-out.

Oh, the sweet irony of someone taking the time to complain about people who complain.

@Pedro said:

The real deal is that you don't like these people's concerns and because you don't like it you boil it down to some childish complaint when the real problem is that you simply don't want to address the issue. Addressing issues take time and mental power which most are just to lazy to endure. The issue is there and people would vocalize the issue whether you like it or not. You are complaining about these people "whittle feewings" when at the same time your "whittle feewings" are troubled when others voice complaints or bring attention to specific issues. It is simply selfishness. If any of these issues that people voice their concern about you can relate to or directly affected you, I am 100% sure that you would be expressing your "whittle feewings". If people didn't express their "whittle feewings" many of the liberties and luxuries that you enjoy today would not exist. So you can go ahead pretend to bottle up your "feewings" but in the end we still have to deal with because it would express itself in some form or the other.

Pedro, Pedro... We all just need to MAN up. Be tough guys! Can't you tell? Who cares about sexism? If we all just took it, and didn't complain... well yeah, nothing would change, but we'd still be mentally stronger for it. And that's all that matters. Us.

#86 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@experience_fade: lol, you just used 2 of the lamest rationales possible in this debate: the "just man up" and "complain about the complainers." way to use them inappropriately and worthlessly.

the very obvious point, is that too many people yap about unbelievably foolish "offenses." legitimate sexism and racism and the like, when, argued inappropriately or at the wrong time or too much or in an idiotic manner HURT one's argument.

as well, to think that legitimate sexism and racism and the like need to always be publicized does nobody any good. it's yapping for yappings sake. for example: i'm a stay at home dad and if there's one aspect of feminism i can acutely understand it's the stay at home parent. however, every time somebody says something derogatory doesn't mean i pipe up.

let alone, all the worthless things people cry about.

#87 Posted by toast_burner (21285 posts) -

The original mortal Kombat is pretty tame compared to the new ones. Also you're ignoring that loads of people complained when Mortal Kombat came out. People being outraged about the content of games is not new.

#88 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@Pedro: lol, addressing the horde of childish complaints from mentally weak individuals is ez and hardly time-consuming. you see, i am truly talking about how weak one's mind must be in order to get upset and offended at trivial and childish and worthless aspects of life and then get to the point where they publicize their weakness, i mean, sensitivities.

not a day goes by, literally, where i am not forced to shake my head and/or laugh at some fool yapping on about some affront they feel happened to them and their need to let us all know.

hey, i know the solution: trophies for everyone and time-out.

Your perspective is amazingly narrow. I don't think it would be possible to come to some level of commonality if the core of your perspective is along the lines of "If I don't understand it doesn't exist". You also have a very small understanding of what makes a weak mind especially when your point of view is so heavily sculpted by cultural norms. The irony.

#89 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@Pedro: lol, i simply made a very obvious comment on the over-sensitivity of people today and the reality that it is associated with a weakness of mind. we're talking very obvious Seinfeld stuff here.

the truth of the oversensitive nature of people these days isn't narrow, doesn't come from a lack of understanding, isn't influenced by culture and irony isn't involved.

lol, i think it comes down to the gall you feel towards me typing the very obvious. how could i do such a thing? don't i know i might be hurting somebody's feelings?

#90 Posted by HailtotheQueen (156 posts) -

@Pedro: the point, pedro, is that people, when, feeling oh so negatively effected need to keep it to themselves and deal with it themselves and grow mentally stronger as they... keep and deal with it themselves.

so what if someone's behavior is "negative" and i am impacted by hurt of my whittle feewings? i, MAN UP and deal with it appropriately.

i don't, however, say, something foolish like, oh, my whittle feewings were hurt and i need to let everyone know that my sensitivities were touched.

btw, yes, modern technology, facebook, insta, etc. are part of the problem.

You sound like a sociopath. Your complete lack of basic human empathy is astounding. You're basically saying you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself.

#91 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@udubdawgz1 said:

@Pedro: the point, pedro, is that people, when, feeling oh so negatively effected need to keep it to themselves and deal with it themselves and grow mentally stronger as they... keep and deal with it themselves.

so what if someone's behavior is "negative" and i am impacted by hurt of my whittle feewings? i, MAN UP and deal with it appropriately.

i don't, however, say, something foolish like, oh, my whittle feewings were hurt and i need to let everyone know that my sensitivities were touched.

btw, yes, modern technology, facebook, insta, etc. are part of the problem.

You sound like a sociopath. Your complete lack of basic human empathy is astounding. You're basically saying you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself.

Shhh... He wants to be the cool dad, so don't take away the badassery from him. :P

#92 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@hailtothequeen: lol, AngryWhiteMaleSyndrome, right?

i have the ability to think critically and discuss the subject of the over-sensitive nature of people in society.

to discount that fact and reality is quite telling.

to distort my comment into a "you have no empathy" rationale is untrue and intellectually dishonest. (or, you're simply incapable.)

#93 Edited by experience_fade (259 posts) -
@Pedro said:
@hailtothequeen said:
@udubdawgz1 said:

@Pedro: the point, pedro, is that people, when, feeling oh so negatively effected need to keep it to themselves and deal with it themselves and grow mentally stronger as they... keep and deal with it themselves.

so what if someone's behavior is "negative" and i am impacted by hurt of my whittle feewings? i, MAN UP and deal with it appropriately.

i don't, however, say, something foolish like, oh, my whittle feewings were hurt and i need to let everyone know that my sensitivities were touched.

btw, yes, modern technology, facebook, insta, etc. are part of the problem.

You sound like a sociopath. Your complete lack of basic human empathy is astounding. You're basically saying you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself.

Shhh... He wants to be the cool dad, so don't take away the badassery from him. :P

I'm actually enjoying his posts more than Jacanuk's.

Guy's on these forums debating games like Oblivion and TLoU, because that's worthwhile, but a societal issue that has permeated into a huge genre of entertainment? Well, who cares. Offended by sexism in the video game industry? Don't have such a weak mind.

Join the strong minds, where we debate MEANINGFUL things...like which Gears of War game to buy.

#94 Posted by loafofgame (421 posts) -

@experience_fade: lol, you just used 2 of the lamest rationales possible in this debate: the "just man up" and "complain about the complainers." way to use them inappropriately and worthlessly.

the very obvious point, is that too many people yap about unbelievably foolish "offenses." legitimate sexism and racism and the like, when, argued inappropriately or at the wrong time or too much or in an idiotic manner HURT one's argument.

as well, to think that legitimate sexism and racism and the like need to always be publicized does nobody any good. it's yapping for yappings sake. for example: i'm a stay at home dad and if there's one aspect of feminism i can acutely understand it's the stay at home parent. however, every time somebody says something derogatory doesn't mean i pipe up.

let alone, all the worthless things people cry about.

People live in their own little bubble. You see it on these forums with people starting the same top 5 thread over and over again, initiating the same discussions being completely oblivious of what has already been discussed. Every trivial and serious issue has already been discussed to a point of redundancy. Everything is always publicized. Every single discussion is 'yapping for yappings sake'. The internet is one big yapping place. This isn't a problem though. It's a reality that is easily ignored, just like people's feelings.

#96 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (570 posts) -

@loafofgame: lol, hey, i'm a yapper at heart, too. i merely pointed out the very obvious: people are over-sensitive. people get "offended" or have their feelings "hurt" all the time over some of the most childish things imaginable. and, the so-called counter-argument is something along the lines of, "all hurt feelings are equal and worthy of empathy."

i do it, we all do it and we would all benefit, individually and societally, from being able to show discretion and discernment.

#97 Posted by juboner (353 posts) -

@Pedro: No when the gov. does things for you they give you their choice and that is it. I am talking about the principles and already said most conservative politicians are just putting on a front.

#98 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@juboner: I believe we are in agreeance...right?

#99 Posted by Pedro (21004 posts) -

@loafofgame: lol, hey, i'm a yapper at heart, too. i merely pointed out the very obvious: people are over-sensitive. people get "offended" or have their feelings "hurt" all the time over some of the most childish things imaginable. and, the so-called counter-argument is something along the lines of, "all hurt feelings are equal and worthy of empathy."

i do it, we all do it and we would all benefit, individually and societally, from being able to show discretion and discernment.

The manner in which you worded your complaint was not as clear as this, so I agree with you cautiously.

#100 Posted by juboner (353 posts) -

@Pedro: Not really sure, would have to read all your post before I could say.