AGS Awards votes close at 13:59 BST on Wednesday 07 March 2018. You've already voted, so you've got 17 days and 17 hours left to wait before voting closes!

Show Posts

You can view here all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas to which you currently have access.

Messages - Ali

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 137
General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 14:46 »
Unshakeable belief is not synonymous with bigotry. I think fire burns and rain falls and you won't convince me otherwise. That's not bigotry; it has no victims.

While I have criticised people for defending Trump and Trump voters - there is a difference between belonging to a racial or ethnic group and being (for example) a Trump supporter. You're not born a Trump supporter, you decide to be one and criticism is legitimate.

I don't think I've demonstrated obstinate devotion to any prejudices. If I'm wrong, I'd love to be corrected.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 14:05 »
I'm sorry you're sad. But the google definition of a word is not the "actual" definition of a word. That's not how the English language works.

Compassion yes, tolerance no. I feel compassion for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised, under-educated, blinkered and misled Americans who voted for Trump. Tolerance of their jingoistic racism and misogyny? Never.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 15 Nov 2016, 13:41 »
I am not going to give in to the mass hysteria. It'll calm down in a few months like it always does. The people will forget about for about 3 years.

*Bookmarks thread and waits*

Also, Merriam Webster's definition of bigot more closely reflects contemporary usage:

"a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)"

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 20:51 »
So considering everyone is treating this like it's the end of the world, newspapers and all, means that there's hope that it isn't all that bad. ;-D

Yes, this time we're better prepared.

Writer of ‘Taxi Driver,’ ‘Raging Bull’ Pens Post-Election ‘Call to Violence’

The mask drops.

That proves it!

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 20:24 »
Come on, people. It'll be ok. Nothing will change. Every politician ever has been a corrupt piece of shit, we just didn't get a chance to fight about it on social media so it wasn't as interesting as it is now, and the dirt didn't spread around the globe faster than light, so we lived in sweet ignorance.

I hope you folks who think this is business as usual are right. I will say this though: When students in Nazi Germany held book burnings in universities, what was the international reaction? Presumably revulsion, horror? Fear of what it might foreshadow?

Not really. People thought it was crass, a little uncivilised. A few leftist intellectuals got very wound up, but most newspapers didn't pay it much heed. Business as usual, nothing really changes...

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 15:51 »
I won't judge people for where they come from, but it is reasonable to make judgements about people based on their actions.

If someone supports a racist, they are behaving in a racist way. I won't write them off as an evil monster and I'll listen to their reasons, but I'm not going to blink at racism.

It's great that you can call for peace and unity, that's what I want too. But people have a right to be afraid of the resurgent far-right. It's not bandwagon-jumping - people are actually frightened of the consequences of the decision that 18% of Americans made and 46.9% didn't try to stop. It's not just about us all having different views, it's about people who are literally in fear for their lives and afraid for their children's futures.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 12:48 »
Anyway, I've made my point. I'll not gain anything by arguing with a self-identified -ist.

I was going to leave this, but since you prefer to focus on pedantry than real issues - when did I identify as an "-ist"? I mean I try to be some "-ists" and I try not to be some other "-ists", but I didn't self-identify as any of them in this thread.

But hey, we're all delighted that you're so relaxed about bigotry. That sounds swell.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 14 Nov 2016, 11:44 »
Scavenger should have said: "some of their stories approach the truth in the most roundabout way." Then he wouldn't have been guilty of inflammatory exaggeration of the sort that upsets Breitbart readers so much.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 13 Nov 2016, 14:36 »
Being a feminist is sexist. Ignorance is strength. We can all read Orwell, some of us understood it.

EDIT: And in case a mod feels like this is off topic, I would argue it's not. Many people are living in a fact-free fantasy world, oppressed by evil feminists and tyrannical Black Lives Matter activists, and those people just voted for an orange fascist. It's relevant.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 13 Nov 2016, 14:29 »
Oh no, am I being sexist against men? OH NO!

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 13 Nov 2016, 13:08 »
Cuiki and Jack, you're talking like Philip J. Fry: "It's a widely believed fact".

If a woman is "widely regarded" as being corrupt, when she's no more corrupt than the next man, there's a good chance that misogyny has a hand in it. I have no idea what Zuma or Samuel L. Jackson have to do with this.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 12 Nov 2016, 21:39 »
There is a notable overlap between 'politically incorrect' and 'factually incorrect'.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 12 Nov 2016, 20:07 »
I don't care that Jack 'labelled' Clinton female - she is female. I object to him calling her the "most openly corrupt female politician in history."

The vast majority of politicians in history are men, and all the people who've held the office of President are men. Clinton should be compared to them. By comparing Clinton to other female politicians, rather than other politicians, he was holding her to a different, in this case higher, standard because of her sex. That is a sexist thing to do. He should try to make his argument without relying on implicit prejudices.

I don't mind you singling me out, but I don't see anything bigoted in dactylopus's quote.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 12 Nov 2016, 18:14 »
What I meant by political correctness, personally, was things like Ali saying that Jack shouldn't use the word female when refering to Hillary being corrupt. I mean, I get it's a label, and her gender shouldn't have anything to do with being corrupt, but from a pragmatic point of view, someone who demonizes such labeling could do more harm than someone who casually uses it. Don't get me wrong Ali, I am definitely on your side in the bigger picture, but maybe it's not just people like me who should be more careful with their words.

I'm all for being polite and trying to understand other people's views, although my intemperate post is not the best example of that. But the left and Jonathan Pie are beating themselves up for demonising Trump supporters. The names we used, the labels we threw around are to blame for his victory.

I don't think Trump supporters are all evil, but there's this idea that 60 million people can't be racist, can't be sexist, can't be homophobic. 60 million people CAN be all those things. Anyone can, it's very easy. I've been guilty of each of them, to my shame.

But if we can't name bigotry for fear of causing offence, for fear of 'labelling' someone, then where does that get us? How does it help the left to tiptoe around the feelings of people who want to BE racist, but don't want to be CALLED racist? Millions of people decided that they were prepared to at least *tolerate* Trump's racism.

Perhaps articles which call racist people racist should have a 'label' warning at the top to prevent anyone from getting *labelled*.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 10 Nov 2016, 18:47 »
But the idea that she is exceptionally corrupt in comparison with the men who have previously held the office of President takes a spoonful of sexism to go down.

I used the word female because I assumed there must've been male politicians more openly corrupt than her. Your assumption that I used the word female pejoratively is... Yes...

If there are male politicians more corrupt than her, then she is not exceptionally corrupt! She belongs to the group 'politicians', not 'female politicians'. Your use of the word was sexist and you cannot get out of that by ending sentences... with ellipses...

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 10 Nov 2016, 13:11 »
I'm no fan of Clinton, she is way too far to the right for me. But the idea that she is exceptionally corrupt in comparison with the men who have previously held the office of President takes a spoonful of sexism to go down.


General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 10 Nov 2016, 12:42 »
And that's more drivel directly from the MSM.

If you don't like me you're a mysogynist/antisemite/racist!!!

My rule is more like: if you don't like women/jews/black people you're a mysogynist/antisemite/racist. (Though there is an amazing intersection between mysogynists/antisemites/racists and people I don't like.)

You absolutely should remove the word female from that sentence, because her femaleness is utterly irrelevant to her level of corruption. You're probably right that Clinton lost more than Trump won. But the idea that she is any more corrupt than other career politicians with her prominence and experience is a conspiratorial fantasy with misogynist overtones.

I admire Andail and others for trying to understand the white, disenfranchised, less educated, white, lower-middle class, white communities that came out for Trump. But we've been tolerating and indulging the 'valid concerns' of ignorant, culturally atavistic white folk since the 2008 crash (which had bugger all to do with immigrants) and that's given us Brexit and Brexit x5. Hopefully not the first two links in a dangerous chain-reaction.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 10 Nov 2016, 11:35 »
I also apologise for misunderstanding.

They insisted on lifting up the most openly corrupt female politician in history.

The key word in this sentence is 'female'.

General Discussion / Re: Trumpmageddon
« on: 10 Nov 2016, 04:00 »
I am disappointed to see people using the term SJW on these forums. On the internet, of all places.

Social JUSTICE Warrior. If that sounds like a bad thing to you, you should strongly reconsider. If you feel comforted by Trump's illiterate jingoism, you should strongly reconsider. If you think people have no reason to be frightened, you should strongly reconsider. If you don't see the racism and misogyny, it is either because you choose not to or because you are a racist misogynist.

You're the ones that future generations will look back on in utter bewilderment. How could ostensibly decent people have been so wrong?

EDIT: To comply with forum rules, I have replaced abusive language in the above post with the phrase "strongly reconsider". Yes, it has affected the scansion.

Thanks for posting that, Cat. There are also full breakdowns of the talks by Rebecca (Azure) here:

Also, in case you missed it, we are looking for game trailers to play on the livestream (and possibly on screens at the event). All the details are here:

By the way, if you have any questions you'd like us to put to the panellists, now would be a great time to suggest them!

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 137