Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 20 of 25 1 2 18 19 20 21 22 24 25
Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
I did read through it, which is why I'm laughing at you.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
Originally Posted by Dexai
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
The heart of traditional (toxic) masculinity is insecurity. .

If you can reduce the entirety of traditional masculinity and put it as equivalent to toxic masculinity, then you probably have a very narrowminded and likely ideologically framed view of masculinity; if not an outright chauvinist one.


Originally Posted by spacehamster95
The point I was trying to make that he was a masculine guy (reacting to posts claiming that he was too feminine for some reason).

It was fairly obvious from what the other people wrote that they thought of Wyll not as "too feminine" but too juvenile. Somebody not being masculine does not make them feminine.

If you read through this discussion, it really shows how much people think in the dichotomy of masc/fem. So yes, not being masculine, means being feminine, because femininity has been defined as a lack by as old as Aristotle.

About traditional masculinity. Yes, there is a crisis of masculinity today, in post-feminism society, because we have discovered that the way we used to think man should be, that ain't shit. That's one of the challenges of contemporary men that we have to construct a healthy idea of masculinity that is not toxic (as the traditional idea was). That is not a chauvinist attitude, only it is informed by the findings of the past fifty years of cultural scholarship.

I am a dude. I have problems with emotion. I get angry, sometimes too much because I was taught that is the only valid emotion I am allowed to have. I have my heroes, mostly from antiquity whom I admire, but I also see how sometimes they were ain't shit.

Definitely narrowminded and ideolically framed, chauvinist overtones amplified.


Optimistically Apocalyptic
Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Okay, guys. Bless your hearts, then.

Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
Okay, guys. Bless your hearts, then.
No, no, bless your heart. You clearly need more love in there. Learn to forgive men for the great sins they have comitted against you. Lmao.

Joined: Dec 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Kadajko
Originally Posted by Sordak
Some of these qualities are diametrically opposed however. And sometimes it just takes two people to tackle a problem.

Sure, but it doesn't matter which side you are on regardless of your sex.

Originally Posted by Sordak
Men and women are literaly made for one another. i dont know how such a wholesome statement could be considered so controversial.

Sure. I don't think it's controversial, if we are talking about reproduction.

Originally Posted by Sordak
For what its worth, men and women do things differently and thus they get things done.

Individuals do things differently regardless of their sex.

Originally Posted by Sordak
Id like to remind you of that book about a woman who decided to live as a man for a year, only to discover that despite herself seeing herself as a very masculine woman, men saw her as an overly feminine men when disguised.

Haven't read the book, but I guess she had a faulty perception of how masculine she actually was.

Originally Posted by Sordak
Im not saying you CANNOT have feminine traits as a man and vice versa.
Im saying that youll eventually be a man with some feminine qualities. These cannot just be swapped around.

What are you even trying to say here? I am confused. You just said that you can have feminine traits as a man, that means you can be a feminine man.. so what cannot be swapped?


Originally Posted by Sordak
And this only takes into account a single Human beeing.
Once you introduce more people (such as in lets say an adventuring party) you start getting group behaviours which are even more influenced by evolutionary biology.
Read up on the American military and how group dynamics change when women and men are in mixed units.
The same behaviour when done by a man and by a woman will have a different effect.

If you put a bunch of feminine men and a bunch of masculine men into the same unit the dynamic will also be different than if it was a group of all likeminded individuals. Once again, sex is irrelevant, it's the individual.

Originally Posted by Sordak
This is due to men and women beeing different, having different bodies and having different evolutionary pressures.

Individuals also have different biology. I know there are tendencies, but in society we ought to judge everyone on an individual basis. Also one thing you have to understand is that biology is often dumb and it is not in your best interest to blindly follow it, I'll give you an example:

I had an ear canal infection once, which messed up my vestibular system, during that time I had motion sickness and constantly wanted to vommit, because my lizard brain thought that it's because I ate something poisonous, but I knew better because I was diagnosed at the hospital, so fought the urge to vommit constantly to keep down the food and water to get well faster rather than give into the instinct and be sick while hungry and dehydrated.

Sordak is pushing a bunch of nonsense based upon a very poor understanding of the world, but there should be some clarification. People tend to have specific internal qualities that come from nature - and certain ones are possessed by most people coded XX and other ones are possessed by most people coded XY, but not the other way around. Very few people, if any, have all the markers of XX or XY, but there are tendencies. In essence, these mark out gender; this is what is internal and defines someone. On top of this, you have societally made gender roles which shape men and women to act in specific ways artificially such as that women should stay at home or that it is the man's job to protect the home and provide or that men are always in charge. The societal stuff is what tends to be toxic because it is designed to maintain a specific societal structure that has a specific purpose - which in our case is a patriarchal structure where property is passed on through men and men want to make sure that the children they are handing it down to are theirs. Of course, some people are born in bodies that are identified as masculine but their internal gender is feminine and vice versa. There are women who are born into bodies that are coded XY. There are intersex people that are coded XXXY or XXY or XYY or XXYY, etc who aren't coded so clearly. There are people born in the Carribbean as little girls then during puberty they grow penises and easily adapt to being men despite being raised as women.

Sordak's views come from those artificial gender roles that oppress men and women alike and a lack of knowledge about how human biology actually works beyond a fourth grade level. He wants to play in 1e as originally written before everyone disregarded the rules on gender because they were horribly oppressive and added nothing to the game.

Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
If it was nonsense you could easily disprove it. I happen to agree with Sordak, and I don't see any argument, not a single one, why I should take feminist/progressive hatepropaganda over the traditional view. You guys simply criticize and present no alternative that is appealing at all.
It's really not interesting after I listened to this garbage for 10 years.

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
It is not our job to educate you. It is yours. If you agree with Sordak because he doesn't move you out of your comfort zone, that is great.

Happy Holidays!

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
In essence, these mark out gender; this is what is internal and defines someone.

I don't subscribe to the idea that a person has an internal gender I view gender only as social construct that consists of behevioral rules. That which is internal I simply call ''character'' or ''personality'' which does not have a direct parallel to ones sex even though there are tendencies.

Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
The societal stuff is what tends to be toxic because it is designed to maintain a specific societal structure that has a specific purpose - which in our case is a patriarchal structure where property is passed on through men and men want to make sure that the children they are handing it down to are theirs.

I don't believe that one sex is better off in society than the other as a whole, I believe that there are upsides and downsides in how each is treated due to sexism.

Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
Of course, some people are born in bodies that are identified as masculine but their internal gender is feminine and vice versa. There are women who are born into bodies that are coded XY.

I don't subscribe to this idea as I have mentioned earlier I see gender as a social construct, while I view men / women through a lense of biological sex which unlike gender is a biological fact.

Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
Sordak's views come from those artificial gender roles that oppress men and women alike and a lack of knowledge about how human biology actually works

Agree here.

Last edited by Kadajko; 23/12/20 02:46 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
It is not our job to educate you. It is yours. If you agree with Sordak because he doesn't move you out of your comfort zone, that is great.

Happy Holidays!
Thats a lot of projection here from a guy who rejects evo-psych despite admittedly never reading up on it because it goes against his comfortbale man-hating religion.
Also careful with that smug "education" attitude. You may not think that you should educate people (and really, that should be done by professionals), but right wing traditionalists most definitely feel like they should educate people and they do. If they do their education and you just act smug and superior you will lose out in the long run.

But of course that would assume you have actual knowledge instead of hate-propaganda against men. Oh foolish me...

Last edited by Bruh; 23/12/20 02:50 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
OK, saying that I don't agree with the mansplaning about my gender is feminist hatepropaganda now. This discussion did go downhill quickly. I said my piece and am out now until this thread goes back to companion wishes.


"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Bruh
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
It is not our job to educate you. It is yours. If you agree with Sordak because he doesn't move you out of your comfort zone, that is great.

Happy Holidays!
Thats a lot of projection here from a guy who rejects evo-psych despite admittedly never reading up on it because it goes against his comfortbale man-hating religion.
Dude, as I have written multiple times, I have nothing against the field of evo-psych.

I just don't believe Sordak's bs has anything to do with it and he only name dropped the field to claim a phony authority in the discussion.

But I am out, too. Have a nice holidays everybody!

Last edited by spacehamster95; 23/12/20 02:53 PM.
Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Guys and gals why don't we instead celebrate the fact that we are so different but BG3 brings us together?

Last edited by Kadajko; 23/12/20 02:59 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by spacehamster95
I just don't believe Sordak's bs has anything to do with it and he only name dropped the field to claim a phony authority in the discussion.

But I am out, too. Have a nice holidays everybody!
And in my opinion he didn't just namedrop it. There my word against yours.

Originally Posted by fylimar
OK, saying that I don't agree with the mansplaning about my gender is feminist hatepropaganda now. This discussion did go downhill quickly. I said my piece and am out now until this thread goes back to companion wishes.
Well I don't agree with your womansplaining about your gender either.

Last edited by Bruh; 23/12/20 02:59 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Bruh
Well I don't agree with your womansplaining about your gender either.

I am a woman, I'm pretty sure that makes me more of an expert about my gender than you. You might have noticed, that I didn't engage in the discussion about men and masculinity, I have my own thoughts about that, but unlike you, I find it disrespectful to tell the other gender, what they have to think about themselves.


"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by fylimar
Originally Posted by Bruh
Well I don't agree with your womansplaining about your gender either.

I am a woman, I'm pretty sure that makes me more of an expert about my gender than you. You might have noticed, that I didn't engage in the discussion about men and masculinity, I have my own thoughts about that, but unlike you, I find it disrespectful to tell the other gender, what they have to think about themselves.

Everyone can engage about any discussion regardles of their own gender. You may think it disrespectful, but I think using the word "mansplaining" is more disrespectful.

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by fylimar
I am a woman, I'm pretty sure that makes me more of an expert about my gender than you.

Not necessarily. An expert is a person that simply has extensive knowledge on the subject, regardless of personal experience, aka anecdotal evidence.

Originally Posted by fylimar
You might have noticed, that I didn't engage in the discussion about men and masculinity, I have my own thoughts about that, but unlike you, I find it disrespectful to tell the other gender, what they have to think about themselves.

Not at all disrespectful, you are allowed to have your opinion and can start productive discussions about men. Also what a person thinks about themselves is not always true, I might for example think that I am a kind person but others might disagree, my opinion is not the only one that is valid.

Last edited by Kadajko; 23/12/20 03:14 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Kadajko
Originally Posted by fylimar
I am a woman, I'm pretty sure that makes me more of an expert about my gender than you.

Not necessarily. An expert is a person that simply has extensive knowledge on the subject, regardless of personal experience, aka anecdotal evidence.

Originally Posted by fylimar
You might have noticed, that I didn't engage in the discussion about men and masculinity, I have my own thoughts about that, but unlike you, I find it disrespectful to tell the other gender, what they have to think about themselves.

Not at all disrespectful, you are allowed to have your opinion and can start productive discussions about men. Also what a person thinks about themselves is not always true, I might for example think that I am a kind person but others might disagree, my opinion is not the only one that is valid.

In general, I agree with you, but I did found the way, Bruh and Sordak talked about women really disrespectful, that is, why I reacted asI did. I'm generally OK with discussing the other gender, but not here in this environment.
I'm coming back, when it goes back to the topic of companions we like to see.


"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Dec 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Kadajko
I don't subscribe to the idea that a person has an internal gender I view gender only as social construct that consists of behevioral rules. That which is internal I simply call ''character'' or ''personality'' which does not have a direct parallel to ones sex even though there are tendencies.

Well, science disagrees with your conclusions.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

Originally Posted by Kadajko
I don't believe that one sex is better off in society than the other as a whole, I believe that there are upsides and downsides in how each is treated due to sexism.

Both are harmed, but women still get the shorter straw. Though, the statement you are replying to doesn't claim that in itself and this is essentially unprompted.

Originally Posted by Kadajko
I don't subscribe to this idea as I have mentioned earlier I see gender as a social construct, while I view men / women through a lense of biological sex which unlike gender is a biological fact.

And, once again, science disagrees with you. They see the overarching pattern and you are essentially denying trans people their existence after the reality of our struggle has been painstakingly proven from times when experts wouldn't even consider taking it seriously enough to study. There is internal gender shown through different ways that male and female brains tend to form and function and trans people who have been claiming they feel like the other have been shown to show those same patterns as the cisgender counterparts of their claimed gender.

Originally Posted by Bruh
Thats a lot of projection here from a guy who rejects evo-psych despite admittedly never reading up on it because it goes against his comfortbale man-hating religion.
Also careful with that smug "education" attitude. You may not think that you should educate people (and really, that should be done by professionals), but right wing traditionalists most definitely feel like they should educate people and they do. If they do their education and you just act smug and superior you will lose out in the long run.

But of course that would assume you have actual knowledge instead of hate-propaganda against men. Oh foolish me...

Evolutionary psychology is not very well respected within academia and specifically derided for not having testable hypotheses and thus not being falsifiable. Once it can form falsifiable claims is the point where people will potentially take it seriously.

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by VeronicaTash

No, because I don't subscribe to the idea of transitioning, it actually supports my conclusion, that a female can have a brain structure typical of males and vice verse. In my opinion a society without sexism would not have trans people, there would be nothing to transition to, as you could be as feminine / masculine as you like regardless of your sex.

Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
Both are harmed, but women still get the shorter straw.

I'm not sure how you would go about reliably quantifying the harm.

Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
And, once again, science disagrees with you. They see the overarching pattern and you are essentially denying trans people their existence after the reality of our struggle has been painstakingly proven from times when experts wouldn't even consider taking it seriously enough to study. There is internal gender shown through different ways that male and female brains tend to form and function and trans people who have been claiming they feel like the other have been shown to show those same patterns as the cisgender counterparts of their claimed gender.

But you realize that not all people have gender right? I actually don't have problems with trans people existing or them doing whatver they like, my disagreement is only in the use of language, which stems from my conviction of making rational sense of everything in the world. No person has ever been able to rationally explain what gender is, because it is an emotion, a feeling. I can't feel other peoples emotions, and I don't share them, that's why I make sense of the physical reality and connect language to that instead.

Joined: Dec 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by VeronicaTash
Evolutionary psychology is not very well respected within academia and specifically derided for not having testable hypotheses and thus not being falsifiable. Once it can form falsifiable claims is the point where people will potentially take it seriously.

That is just an appeal to authority fallacy. Fields of science that rock the boat of consensus are never respected. Just look at the the story of Ignaz Semmelweis who was bullied to insanity for his accomplishments, because he went against the scientific consensus of his day. Turns out he was right and his theories saved millions of lives.

Page 20 of 25 1 2 18 19 20 21 22 24 25

Moderated by  Dom_Larian, Freddo, vometia 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5