Shadow Hawk

For those who don't remember, I work on a Navy base.
 
Pilot trainee: Do you have any paper for the printer?
Me: The printer with the big sign on it?
Pilot: Yes, that one.
Me: Did you happen to read the sign?
Pilot: Yes, it said "out of ink".  What does that have to do with whether or not you have any paper.
Chief Petty Officer: You graduated from the Naval Academy, right?

Never pick up a duck in a dungeon.

Never pick up a duck in a dungeon.

Stan Lee.  That way he'll be in ALL the movies!

I just finished a book I really liked, and I'm trying to decide if I should allow myself to like it because it has feminism issues.
 

 
To start with, it seems like anything in here should be a little feminism-okay, because Seanan is a woman.
 
Not really. Misogynist attitudes can be and often are perpetuated by women. Several articles to that effect have been posted on this forum. Get on with the actual problems.
 
Well, the main character engages in prostitution. That doesn't define her character, I think. She just uses it as an expedient way to get stuff she needs, and then doesn't give the act another thought. 
 
 
Definitely problematic, although it does seem to depend on the school of feminism you look at. 
 
The author makes good reasons for it though.  She establishes that the character can only be corporeal if a mortal offers her a coat, and since she very much enjoys being corporeal and finds it useful in her real line of work, chapter one involves her trading a quickie for a coat. She is also seen trading blowjobs for her favorite greasy diner foods.
 
Also pointed out on this forum, the 'rules' set up in fiction don't really matter. They're made up.  The author could have written any number of different rules into place such that the character wouldn't have been compelled into prostitution.  And the economic compulsion really is a problematic thing, from a feminist perspective.  Some authors argue that economic compulsion is not much better than the violent or pharmacological compulsion of other forms of rape. Depicting someone resorting to prostitution due to lack of options, and then being casually okay with it, is not good at all.
 
Uh yeah. Speaking of the R word. This book might need a trigger warning. It all happens 'off screen', but it is strongly implied that this is what happens to one of the antagonists as poetic justice.
 
Not good.  Does it reinforce the rapist is evil (even though we already know he is evil), or is it more to explore the crime and its ramifications from the victims perspective.
 
The former.  We're just told the crime is about to happen.
 
Well, I guess that about settles it.
 
The book does have a strong female protagonist, and it does pass the bechdel test. 
 
Might not be enough.
 
*sigh* I guess I'd better go downgrade the number of stars I gave it in my review. Maybe. I'm still conflicted. Arguing with myself in public didn't help.
 
It never does.
 
EDIT: It doesn't help that the ghost protagonist is a 70-year-old that is permanently 16.  Makes all those blowjobs even nastier.

I have CDO.
It's like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order.
Like they should be.

A slow cooker!

That really says something about you since a lot of those ads are targeted on your browsing history.
 
Just because people are pushing in one medium to change the way women are being treated doesn't mean that similar efforts aren't going on for Movies, TV and all media. Video Games are getting the attention because of the Vitriol and evil attacks that the "don't change anything" crowd is tossing at anyone who dares to challenge the status quo.

Okay, three things:
 
1) The article on casual cruelty against women pointed to Anita Sarkeesian's latest video, and Ms Sarkeesian talks about how the depiction of violence against women in video games is different than the depiction of violence against men in the same games.  I'm not going to repeat or summarize what she said.  Go watch the video if you are curious.
 
2) The vast majority of AAA game titles center upon a male protagonist who is the most important character in the game.  Most of the time if he rescues or fails to rescue any particular female in distress the game goes on either way.  Only when the male protagonist dies is all hope considered lost and the game ends.  Most people both male and female would choose to be someone whose actions matter, but in video games this role is usually reserved for male characters.
 
3) Yes, men tend to be portrayed in games, fiction, and news reports as being kind of expendable.  There deaths aren't presented as being as tragic in and of themselves as the deaths of women and children.  So I would consider it a fair point ... if men's rights activist decried this point in games and fiction.  They don't.  They do what you did.  Instead of saying that the game, movie or book is terrible for displaying men's lives as meaningless and expendable, they say that feminist are terrible for failing to decry the depiction of men's lives as being expendable.  Don't complain about the fact that feminist aren't picketing outside The Expendables 3, go picket it yourselves.  Then I will believe MRAs are serious about the issue.  Otherwise, I'm just going to believe that they (and you) are trying to score rhetorical points with an argument that they really believe themselves.

Dehydrated Ocean.

Water.
 
NT: Inventions where you Just Add Water!

It's not the bullet with your name on it that you have to worry about, it's all the ones addressed "to whom it may concern".

I have CDO.
It's like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order.
Like they should be.

Online Harassment, Violence and The Need To Reclaim One’s “Manhood”
 

If you feel that people are trying to bully you into identifying yourself as a cis male, you are overly sensitive (I know that commenting on the validity of other peoples feeling is not PC, but I thought you would appreciate that).
 
The terms cis male and cis female are used primarily in LGBT discussions, and by people trying to give an LGBT perspective on a particular issue.  Now it is fine to say "hand me the wrench" when you are dealing with a small toolbox which has only one kind of wrench.  When your tool box contains a socket wrench, a crescent wrench, a pipe fitter wrench, a monkey wrench and assorted combination wrenches it pays to be specific when asking for a wrench.  The LGBT world has a lot of types of wrenches.  Having a quick way of indicating that you are talking about someone whose biological sex, gender identity, and sexuality all match up with societal expectation can be very helpful at times.
 
Now, you want your personal gender/sexuality combo to the default, requiring no prefix even in LGBT discussions, while all other gender variants receive some sort of label (homo, bi, trans, cross dressing, etc.).  Well I can see why you would want that, but I can't see why the LGBT should concede that to you.  Certainly not if your best argument is to point to chromosomes.  You've already conceded that alternate gender/sexuality have been shown different neurologically structures compared to the "norm".  This has been established by multiple studies.  It is a fact as you say.  That it might be quicker to do a chromosome test or look at what is between someones legs than do a head CT, is irrelevant.  As I pointed out the cis prefix outside of organic chemistry is used mostly in discussion of gender identity and sexuality.  Neurological structures often trump gross anatomy in these matters and it is perfectly legitimate that the language of these discussions reflect this.
 
 
Boldly stated, but mostly BS, and totally BS in the current context.  
 
Language is the battlefield upon which wars of idea if fought.  However, it is also common ground upon which peace treaties for those wars are forged.  If one side totally wins the linguistic war, then your soldiers are terrorist, your religion is heresy and your natural sexual practices are perversions.  At that point, your conscience, expressions and thoughts are truly straight jacketed.  However, what passes for political correctness is not at that point.  It is mostly just an effort to be polite to others who are different than you and yours. Having the linguistic tools to respectfully speak to one another is an aid to open dialogue, not an impediment. The restrictions that are placed by mainstream PC speech* are rarely a serious impediment to free expressions of ideas unless the idea that is being expressed is that their group of people is inferior to your group of people.  
 
Certainly the term cis gendered poses little danger of straight jacketeding expression.  It is merely a particular gender/sexuality that happens to be yours and you want it to be the default even in discussions where a range of gender identities are being discussed.  Well tough. You don't get to have it that way.
 
 
 
*Note the description of wives as "unpaid sex workers" never caught on and has never been the official PC term for them

It isn't about sex so much as it is about gender. One is biological, the other is social.
 
In any case, it doesn't really matter whether you approve or not. "Pursuit of happiness" is a basic civil right, and if someone happier living as the "other" gender, it "neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg" to let them.
 
Vondy, the quality of your arguments has gone downhill lately. This sounds less like a carefully reasoned argument and more like a rant about how it makes you angry that people are starting to call you on your bullcrap. Furthermore, you lose track of (what I take to be) your main point and spend most of your post ranting about how political correctness is oppressive.
 
 
Then you shouldn't expect anyone to acquiesce to YOUR subjective beliefs, either. For instance, you shouldn't be allowed to mutilate a baby boy's penis because your religious beliefs say it's okay.
 
 
I absolutely agree--that's one of the best arguments against religion.
 
I sadly predict that Vondy's response here will be an accusation of anti-Semitism or some such emotional response, rather than an honest reflection on whether he's unfairly privileging his own beliefs over others. He also likes to accuse me of not addressing his arguments, which were: 1) transgenderism doesn't reflect biology, and 2) political correctness sometimes leads to people criticizing things I say. So, here goes:
1) No duh.
2) " I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express."
 
Now, I've made some uncharitable predictions about Vondy's behavior, so I'm cooking up a big juicy humble pie with a side of crow here. I would rather be wrong than right in those predictions, and I apologize in advance if I am.

The Evil Captain Lensflare...

George Lucas, for making Star Wars I-III.

Actually most of that Misandrist stuff comes from a particularly nasty branch of 2nd wave Feminist Separatists, Now called TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). They are second wavers that see Misogyny in everything. The right wing has used that minor branch of Feminism to Tar all Feminists.
First Wave Feminists were all pretty darn welcoming of all women no matter what their history. Most Third Wavers are actually even more welcoming than the first wavers were.
 
Really the Majority of Feminists DO want to see true equality for all genders and Races.
 
There are plenty of people who wish that Media would present violence in a serious, tragic way that explores emotional and physical consequences. It intersects with Feminism because of the belief that American society's embracing the idea that violence is a good thing that has no consequence. When to the multitudes of victims of Domestic Abuse (male and female) that idea makes their life a living hell. Showing all sides of Violence and not just the big warhero who kills tons of people and doesn't have an concern in the world. As opposed to the soldiers of Vietnam, Desert Storm, Afganistan and Iraq who are coming home with real mental issues including PTSD and aren't getting enough care because we think that real heroes can do all of that stuff without consequence to their psyche.

I still say I'd love to watch a debate on feminism and porn between Dave Willis and Tatsuya Ishida.

Four college students and a Great Dane show up to deal with him, driving a gaudily-decorated van.

"Uur de boop de kee, dur fuur de boop de duu,
Puur feeg de nuutuur de muu,
Börk! Börk! Börk!"

And you know what they say about bombs--some days you just can't get rid of them.

Now that my death ray is fully charged, I don't have to pay the damned electric bill.