mashable:

A survey by the Pew Research Center in conjunction with Rutgers University has found that social media doesn’t encourage discussion on controversial subjects. It may, in fact, cause people to stay quiet.


The survey, conducted among 1,801 U.S. adults, asked people about their willingness to discuss the Edward Snowden leaks on social media and in person. Social media users demonstrated a particular hesitance to discuss the topic — 86% of those surveyed said they wold be willing to have an offline discussion on Snowden, while only 42% of Facebook and Twitter users said they would post about it online.

You can learn more about the study here.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 380 notes via/source
xnews xmedia

lee-enfeel:

"I believe in freedom, but only certain kinds of freedom that I specifically agree with" a collaborative autobiography by conservatives and liberals.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 603 notes via/source
xyeah

cyberpsychic:

disquietingtruths:

  1. Student-Loan Debt.
  2. Psychopathologizing and Medicating Noncompliance.
  3. Schools That Educate for Compliance and Not for Democracy.
  4. No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top.”
  5. Shaming Young People Who Take EducationBut Not Their SchoolingSeriously.
  6. The Normalization of Surveillance.
  7. Television.
  8. Fundamentalist Religion and Fundamentalist Consumerism.

Read More

If you aren’t angry yet, then you haven’t been paying attention.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 23,346 notes via/source
xmurica

misspelledlife:

SLAAAAY TORONTO IM SO PROUD OF THIS

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 362,836 notes via/source
xads
zeoarchives:

hehehe

zeoarchives:

hehehe

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 45 notes via/source
xlol xvideo games

nietzschesghost:

officialvolition:

tropes vs women is in no way perfect 

however it does make people think about the problems within the gaming industry 

Well ,no ,because as soon as anyone does some digging or even recognises the examples being used it becomes clear that massive cherry picking and context stripping is occurring  and well….if she has to do that then you have to ask yourself: is the problem actually that bad*?

It’s a self-defeating exercise compounded by things like her tweets talking about her having to play through a game for 8 hours to find a single scene that ‘offends’ her…and then finding out it wasn’t ‘bad’ enough to make it into the episode….you’re searching for problems and holding up the few examples you can find as the standard, so prevalent that you have to play a game for eight hours to find an example…which then wasn’t good enough.

*is anita addressing the issue of day one DLC, unworkable DRM, anti-consumer practices, apparently corrupt relationships tween devs/press because these are issues that would be germane to the gaming industry itself.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 15 Sep 2014 with 57 notes via/source
xas
endgaem:

bwarch:

endgaem:

moonstruck2:

endgaem:

Remember when I talked about feminists who look for reasons to be offended? This is exactly what I was talking about.
It’s one thing to enjoy playing video games and happen by a scene which is genuinely fucked up (I mean chances are it was intended to be fucked up; it’s like people complaining about the violence and drug use in Far Cry games), but it’s entirely another thing to grind through something you don’t even enjoy for a demographic you evidently dislike playing content that you barely understand, removing context and information, just so you can have a reason to take offence. It’s pathetic.

Let me get this straight. she plays a game for 8 hours, looking to be offended, and is mad when she can’t find something.

Yep, you got it on point.

The problem I have with this post is that Anita is doing research when she does this. “capture a particular scene” refers to her work in Femfreq about criticizing certain tropes and whatnot.
She played a game that she didn’t enjoy for the sake of that show and for that research. I’d prefer her work to be well-researched than otherwise.
Also, unpleasant in this context can totally refer to a game that she finds issue with from a writing standpoint, or issue with from a gameplay standpoint. Without further clarification we don’t even know.
I still haven’t even gotten around to watching Femfreq, I don’t even know if I’ll agree with it. More than likely as with most videos that offer this opinion shenanigans I’ll agree and disagree throughout. But this post is criticizing her in a really dumb way considering what she does. Research, guys, I mean really. “Looking for things to be offended about” My gods.

I feel as though you and another user who has responded similarly do not fully understand how either Anita Sarkeesian or Feminist Frequency operates. The purpose of her web series is, as you said, to point out tropes in video games and possible misogynistic behaviour which (in their eyes) is either encouraged or at the very least not discouraged. The problem, though, is Anita does exactly what I described; she looks for reasons to be offended in video games, often, and has at times even ignored in-game prompts to prove her (moot) point.
A prime example that a couple other people brought up early on is her play-through of Hitman Absolution, which is summarized here. In it, she claims that players are encouraged to perform “misogynistic behaviour”, and that even though it isn’t mandatory, it’s “implicitly encouraged”.
What she fails to mention is that…fuck it, I’ll let the analysis do the talking:

Anita then shows a clip of Hitman Absolution, depicting the player character knocking out and dragging the bodies of female strippers around the floor.
While this is happening, the player score counter in the top corner of the screen is actually GOING DOWN.Hitman Absolution doesn’t “implicitly encourage” killing or knocking out civilians, female or otherwise. It actuallydiscouragesthat kind of behavior, by activelypenalizingthe player for it.
So we end up with a case of Anita using video footage that proves wrong the very point she’s making at the time.
Furthermore, only an idiot player is going to interfere with the strippers anyway, as they’re incredibly easy to sneak past, and they only hurt your score if you try interacting with them in any way.
Not only this, but she suggests that the player “cannot help” but perform obscene acts on female NPCs.

Anita Sarkeesian:The player cannot help but treat these female bodies as things to be acted upon,because they were designed, constructed and placed in the environment for that singular purpose. Players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters.

Once again using footage from Hitman Absolution.

What she DOESN’T show is thatyou can kill / knock out male characters, strip them of all their clothes, and leave them lying around in their underwear and/or dumped in a dumpster. Which is something you CANNOT do to female characters (take all their clothes, I mean), and is arguablyworsethan what you CAN do to female characters (kill them / knock them out, drag them around, — and not much else).

She’s done this with a number (and I say a number because she hasn’t even followed through with the rest of the videos she has promised) of her other femfreq videos; this isn’t an isolated incident in the slightest.
So when I and others interpret what she’s said as looking for reasons to be offended it’s based on knowing these things prior to coming to that conclusion; that is, knowing that she has at times intentionally ignored in-game prompts and completely disregarded context just so she would have a reason to be offended by some bullshit “trope” in a video game. It’s happened before, and so it’s no surprise that it could also be the case here.

endgaem:

bwarch:

endgaem:

moonstruck2:

endgaem:

Remember when I talked about feminists who look for reasons to be offended? This is exactly what I was talking about.

It’s one thing to enjoy playing video games and happen by a scene which is genuinely fucked up (I mean chances are it was intended to be fucked up; it’s like people complaining about the violence and drug use in Far Cry games), but it’s entirely another thing to grind through something you don’t even enjoy for a demographic you evidently dislike playing content that you barely understand, removing context and information, just so you can have a reason to take offence. It’s pathetic.

Let me get this straight. she plays a game for 8 hours, looking to be offended, and is mad when she can’t find something.

Yep, you got it on point.

The problem I have with this post is that Anita is doing research when she does this. “capture a particular scene” refers to her work in Femfreq about criticizing certain tropes and whatnot.

She played a game that she didn’t enjoy for the sake of that show and for that research. I’d prefer her work to be well-researched than otherwise.

Also, unpleasant in this context can totally refer to a game that she finds issue with from a writing standpoint, or issue with from a gameplay standpoint. Without further clarification we don’t even know.

I still haven’t even gotten around to watching Femfreq, I don’t even know if I’ll agree with it. More than likely as with most videos that offer this opinion shenanigans I’ll agree and disagree throughout. But this post is criticizing her in a really dumb way considering what she does. Research, guys, I mean really. “Looking for things to be offended about” My gods.

I feel as though you and another user who has responded similarly do not fully understand how either Anita Sarkeesian or Feminist Frequency operates. The purpose of her web series is, as you said, to point out tropes in video games and possible misogynistic behaviour which (in their eyes) is either encouraged or at the very least not discouraged. The problem, though, is Anita does exactly what I described; she looks for reasons to be offended in video games, often, and has at times even ignored in-game prompts to prove her (moot) point.

A prime example that a couple other people brought up early on is her play-through of Hitman Absolution, which is summarized here. In it, she claims that players are encouraged to perform “misogynistic behaviour”, and that even though it isn’t mandatory, it’s “implicitly encouraged”.

What she fails to mention is that…fuck it, I’ll let the analysis do the talking:

Anita then shows a clip of Hitman Absolution, depicting the player character knocking out and dragging the bodies of female strippers around the floor.

While this is happening, the player score counter in the top corner of the screen is actually GOING DOWN.
Hitman Absolution doesn’t “implicitly encourage” killing or knocking out civilians, female or otherwise. It actuallydiscouragesthat kind of behavior, by activelypenalizingthe player for it.

So we end up with a case of Anita using video footage that proves wrong the very point she’s making at the time.

Furthermore, only an idiot player is going to interfere with the strippers anyway, as they’re incredibly easy to sneak past, and they only hurt your score if you try interacting with them in any way.

Not only this, but she suggests that the player “cannot help” but perform obscene acts on female NPCs.

Anita Sarkeesian:
The player cannot help but treat these female bodies as things to be acted upon,because they were designed, constructed and placed in the environment for that singular purpose. Players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters.

Once again using footage from Hitman Absolution.

image

What she DOESN’T show is thatyou can kill / knock out male characters, strip them of all their clothes, and leave them lying around in their underwear and/or dumped in a dumpster. Which is something you CANNOT do to female characters (take all their clothes, I mean), and is arguablyworsethan what you CAN do to female characters (kill them / knock them out, drag them around, — and not much else).

She’s done this with a number (and I say a number because she hasn’t even followed through with the rest of the videos she has promised) of her other femfreq videos; this isn’t an isolated incident in the slightest.

So when I and others interpret what she’s said as looking for reasons to be offended it’s based on knowing these things prior to coming to that conclusion; that is, knowing that she has at times intentionally ignored in-game prompts and completely disregarded context just so she would have a reason to be offended by some bullshit “trope” in a video game. It’s happened before, and so it’s no surprise that it could also be the case here.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 14 Sep 2014 with 3,188 notes via/source
xas
suchabadpenny said:
I liked this blog better when it was about cool movies and trivia instead of about dress codes and arguments. Inb4 "unfollow me"

tenaflyviper:

And I liked this entire site better when I could just post about cool movies and trivia, and didn’t have to hear about people mangling the name of “activism” in order to become the bullies they always wanted to be.  I also liked it better when people actually got along in genuine harmony and equality without the slightest care for how others identified, rather than now having to tread lightly on a veritable political minefield.

Trying to guilt trip anyone else in an attempt to passive-aggressively exert control over what they choose to post on their own blog is quite the unattractive practice.  To claim that anyone shouldn’t be allowed to voice their concerns over the current sociol/political landscape is to imply that it’s better to let a truck dump manure in your driveway than to do a goddamn thing to stop it, just because the driver “likes it better” when it’s on someone else’s property.

answered 2 weeks ago @ 14 Sep 2014 with 51 notes via/source
xtruth

hatey-mchaterson:

tenaflyviper:

poppypicklesticks:

nthesecond:

dumblr—feminist:

alessandrogiovanni1:

disneyvillainsforjustice:

artemuscainpotato:

dumblr—feminist:

"…men actually avoiding contact with women because they’re afraid a simple kiss or date could lead to a sexual assault accusation."

This is a HUGE problem, in fact THIS WHOLE ARTICLE is extremely disgusting. Not to mention the fact that I have seen quite a few other articles about rape hysteria as well. As a victim of rape myself, this needs to stop. I’m not sure why feminists fear rape like grim death, yet at the same time use it as a revenge tool. False rape accusations are at an all time high, and thanks to the very fucked up NEW Definition of rape, which basically seems to me “ANYTHING A GUY DOES THAT I DON’T LIKE” things are spinning out of control.

Honestly? Honestly! Rape is a serious fucking issue, and you know what? Feminists are turning it into a fucking joke. Feminists seem to be really fucking determined to make rape the most trivial thing POSSIBLE. Now men looking at you the wrong way is rape, now men complimenting you is rape, men saying hello, smiling at you, sitting too close to you on a bus. It’s all rape and oppression and WHAT THE FUCK? How determined are you to make not only rape a joke, but also be victims? How determined are you to make WOMEN LOOK AS STUPID AND FUCKING ALARMIST AS POSSIBLE!? You all goddamn complain about how rape ISN’T Something to joke about while simultaneously TURNING RAPE INTO ONE HUGE THREE RINGED CIRCUS!

For the love of God feminists PLEASE FUCKING STOP!

Certain feminists are also doing a great job in gendering the whole freaking issue and making it very difficult for any man who was sexually assaulted to be believed. Or it can strike fear into men who got into sexual situations without consenting themselves, and then worrying and freaking thinking that they are the rapist, especially if alcohol is involved and both parties are drunk. It also doesn’t help when everyone tells men that they always want to have sex, and no one tells them how to say no, or that they even can so no, if the other party initiates the activity.
- Mod Helga

I will say it again this is really fucked up, sad, and incredibly depressing but sadly not at all surprising.

I see a bunch of feminists on here whining about how no guys want them or like them or want to date them but this article is kind of proof how hideous they’ve gotten with their “rape culture”. This is why men don’t wanna talk to you, this is a problem FEMINISTS created not the men.

moral panics are so very empowering of women

I don’t blame those men in the least.  They’re now having to alienate themselves as protection from having their lives potentially ruined.  A few things to note here:

This glorified mass hysteria known as “rape culture” has now finally driven men and women farther apart than ever before.

Now, someone please explain how this is encouraging gender equality, because—maybe I need to get my eyes checked—but I’m just not seeing it.  I’m also not seeing anything that could even remotely be considered “empowerment”.  All I am seeing is resentful women passive-aggressively lashing out in sociologically harmful ways over their own lack of understanding of others, perpetuating unsubstantiated widespread panic, alienating themselves from men even further than they already had, and basically trying to force women to live in a constant state of subservient fear.

If that’s anyone’s idea of “empowerment”, or “protecting” women, then please - keep it to yourselves from now on, because we’re better off without it.

This is bad. This is really, really bad.

reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 14 Sep 2014 with 4,403 notes via/source
xrape

I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

» Mahatma Gandhi (via purplebuddhaproject)  
reblogged 2 weeks ago @ 14 Sep 2014 with 1,320 notes via/source
xquotes xgandhi