Lawnmower Boy

It turns out that's a myth, which is a good thing, because the nurse didn't even realise that I was...
 
I mean, look over there! It's a zeppelin!

It turns out that's a myth, which is a good thing, because the nurse didn't even realise that I was...
 
I mean, look over there! It's a zeppelin!

Only one in four clerics knows this weird secret that vampires are afraid you'll find out!

Very pretty and talented, but that's what 10/10 on the narcissism scale looks like.

Yes, but Las Vegas is a nightmare landscape of nerve-shattering, blinding casino lights and giant handlebar mustaches, whereas Vancouver is the most beautiful place that has ever deigned to let human feet tread its soil. It's different.

Actually, one of the robots is trans-gender.  It was booted with Windows 8, but self-identifies as Apple OS X.

The Straw Elephants In The Room
 
Pretty much all the arguments Ms Sommers makes in the first video are rebuttals to arguments that the anti-GamerGate side isn't making or to very distorted versions of arguments made.  In other words, they are all straw men arguments.
 
* Violent video games have never been scientifically shown to cause real life violence in there players. Umm, I haven't heard Anita Sarkeesian or any one else in the anti-GamerGate camp say that they did.  So this is a rebuttal seeking an argument.
 
* I find some acts shown in video games like GTA very disturbing, but as a matter of free speech the makers have a right to make such games and the players a right to play them. I've yet to hear any anti-GamerGate person call for the banning of such games, and just because a person has a right to freedom of speech does not shield that speech from criticism if the speech is objectionable. 
 
* Anita Sarkeesian's arguments are all based on the Objectifying Gaze hypothesis which has been much criticized in the 4 decades since it was originally proposed.  Ms Sarkeesian has talked the visual objectification of women in video games, so this would be an actual non-straw man argument if Ms Sommers didn't characterize it as the whole of Ms Sarkeesian's position.  However, Ms Sarkeesian has talked about visual objectification and hyper-sexualization of women as one part of a larger argument that she is making, an argument that can stand even in the absence of the visual objectification component.  Also, a more robust attack on the notion of the objectifying gaze as it relates to video games would have been appreciated from an intellectual standpoint.  There is a bit of a difference between the deliberate decision by a game developer to frame a scene from a vantage point looking through a women spread legs or down her cleavage compared to a man taking a moment out to admire a woman's ass as he passes her on the street.  It would have been been nice if Ms Sommers took the time to argue that the criticisms of Objectifying Gaze hypothesis are valid even when presentation is completely deliberate and directed by men.
 
 
In the second video, Ms Sommers provides some numbers about the sex of gamers, and while I don't think that anyone would classify her as a gamer based on playing PacMan  a few times in the Eighties, I do appreciate the numbers.  Numbers can be very helpful in "keeping it real".  Keeping it real in this case goes a long way towards explaining why AAA games are the way they are but it's not really much of a shield against criticism.  It may explain why game developers create so many games point of view of heterosexual white males, but that is no reason women, gays, and racial minorities not to clamor for representation also.  It is no reason for them to "stand down" as Ms Sommers puts it.
 
Also, you can ding games on individual acts of misogyny, without proving that the games cause their players to become misogynous.  Even if the games are promoting misogyny in their players it is going to be almost impossible to prove scientifically because nothing happens in a bubble, and it is irrelevant.  If someone uses the N word, it is not necessary to prove that they turned all the people who heard it into racist in order state that the usage was in itself crass, rude, and racist.  Just so video games criticized for individual bits of misogyny that appear in the games, and if these instances are so numerous as to be wide spread and pervasive then the industry as a whole can be criticized.

Very pretty and talented, but that's what 10/10 on the narcissism scale looks like.

A lot of the photos here qualify
 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/christinehmcconnell/
 
Some cheesecake/beefcake photos as well.

Ranxerox, you're a nice guy, and a thoughtful member of our little community here. Rather than argue with you, I'm going to bow out. Suffice it to say we disagree on Sarkeesian's motives. I think she's a sophomoric attention whore, and that's the last word I'm going to post on the matter.
 
It could be that I'm being unfair, but I haven't yet seen anything to convince me otherwise. I do think it'd be bad form to argue about that opinion given the topic of this thread and the fact that she isn't here to defend herself.

Jesus forgives you for thinking that. That's why you're being turned over to the secular arm for summary execution.

I bought my COM up to 8! Then stupid Steve Long...

Maps of modern cities drawn in the style of J. R. R. Tolkien

I bought my COM up to 8! Then stupid Steve Long...

I've been plowing through a new web comic -- Stand Still, Stay Silent. It's a Post-Apoc story where the only remnants of civilization -- indeed the only known rest om Mankind -- is Iceland and some enclaves in the other Nordic countries. The rest of the world was either wiped out in a plague ninety years ago, or transformed into ... things. It's in English, but seems to be written by a Scandinavian. The art is downright amazing at times (check the first panel!) and the characters are believable.

Not me.
 
I commute.

Not me.
 
I commute.

I've been working my way through "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", and I was doing fine until I hit the episode, "The Body".
 
Given the losses in my life lately, it struck just a bit close to home. It's also one of the best episodes of television that I've seen.

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

New one from Richard! Based on a pulp villain I created, this is Red Devil, Russian bad guy (though once Russia is our ally in WW2, he becomes an ally of sorts himself)