Ryan Gosling (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ryanongosling) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
wankgate2016-08-03 09:56 am
ryanongosling) wrote in wankgate2016-08-03 09:56 am
lmao didn't we just have a survey come out on rpa pointing to the high likelihood of dwrp having upwards of one thousand individual rpers
but yes let's gauge the vitality of the hobby by one obsolete advertising comm
but yes let's gauge the vitality of the hobby by one obsolete advertising comm
i agreed with this. people say having plot is progress, which sounds good in theory, but i think the current game scene is the most boring we've ever been. people just wait for the mod log to come up. and where there is a player plot... it's also a mingle log.
ahaah. okay, not surprised by the pick, but still, cripes
it came to about 1200~1300 individual participants in the survey, plus however many players didn't participate, sooo yeah. everyone can shut up about "omg there's only like a hundred of us dwrp is dying" now.
The Bechdel test (Which the creator would actually like to re-title "The Bechdel-Wallace Test", per last year: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/08/call-it-the-bechdel-wallace-test/402259/ ) came from a comic strip critiquing films in 1985. It was an interesting springboard, but I think the discussions that it spawned are a lot more interesting than "I created a religion around a 5-panel comic".
A book released earlier this year (We Were Feminists Once https://www.amazon.com/Were-Feminists-Once-CoverGirl%C2%AE-Political/dp/1610395891 ) critiques tests like these as part of a larger shift in feminist theory, where the box-checking keeps us watching minutiae instead of focusing on the larger meaning of our fiction. If two women are in a grocery store talking about cleaning supplies, isn't that just as damaging of a symbol? And yet it would pass the Bechdel test. Likewise, a staple of recent "chick flicks" is an all-female cast that is about failed romances. It's about heteronormative relationships, but doesn't feature men - do we embrace them for empowering women to escape failed marriages or do we click our tongues and say "they're talking about men. FAILURE."
Should we limit our testing to the average popcorn action flick? Do the standards of the 80s still apply to us as we move toward the 20s? I wouldn't hate having a richer discourse than we currently do.
A book released earlier this year (We Were Feminists Once https://www.amazon.com/Were-Feminists-Once-CoverGirl%C2%AE-Political/dp/1610395891 ) critiques tests like these as part of a larger shift in feminist theory, where the box-checking keeps us watching minutiae instead of focusing on the larger meaning of our fiction. If two women are in a grocery store talking about cleaning supplies, isn't that just as damaging of a symbol? And yet it would pass the Bechdel test. Likewise, a staple of recent "chick flicks" is an all-female cast that is about failed romances. It's about heteronormative relationships, but doesn't feature men - do we embrace them for empowering women to escape failed marriages or do we click our tongues and say "they're talking about men. FAILURE."
Should we limit our testing to the average popcorn action flick? Do the standards of the 80s still apply to us as we move toward the 20s? I wouldn't hate having a richer discourse than we currently do.
http://wankgate.dreamwidth.org/45191.html?thread=177769351#cmt177769351
"i'm saying that a trigger warning (as opposed to just a warning, or a content warning) is for something that would cause a person recall a traumatic incident they've undergone. nobody here's been cannibalized. that's the joke.jpg"
http://wankgate.dreamwidth.org/45191.html?thread=177789831#cmt177789831
this is the closest i could find to a non-white comment which is basically 'i read this thing and that trumps your dislike of it because it was written by non whites and i read it'.
"i'm saying that a trigger warning (as opposed to just a warning, or a content warning) is for something that would cause a person recall a traumatic incident they've undergone. nobody here's been cannibalized. that's the joke.jpg"
http://wankgate.dreamwidth.org/45191.html?thread=177789831#cmt177789831
this is the closest i could find to a non-white comment which is basically 'i read this thing and that trumps your dislike of it because it was written by non whites and i read it'.
op crossposted to rpanons and is babbling nonsensically over there now and theyre either a troll or significantly impaired
it doesn't really matter. it's still something that both does still occur, regardless of how many people it happens to, and is a gross thing that people might have a squick over. warning about it is the polite thing to do, which can still actually happen, even on wg. stop being so ragingly annoyed your joke wasn't funny because it wasn't a joke.
how does the first comment say anything about non-white people not existing
i'm not even white oh my god
i'm not even white oh my god
i totally want these screencaps
i believe you but i wanna see the crazy for myself bc it sounds unreal
i believe you but i wanna see the crazy for myself bc it sounds unreal
i'm not ragingly annoyed
i'm baffled
legitimately just baffled rn
i'm baffled
legitimately just baffled rn
it was in reference to the first point, which was a comment about the cannibalization. two references, two points. can you math?
can you into coherent sentence-writing or labeling? i had to actually re-read this thread to make sense of what your inordinately angry ass is on about
and "nobody in a tiny dreamwidth community has been cannibalized" still does not mean "nobody in the modern age has been cannibalized" no matter how much you want it to mean that. it means that in all statistical likelihood, because this is a community of about 1k people, nobody has experience with that
this is misplaced outrage the likes of which that post about slutshaming alexander hamilton can't even touch
and "nobody in a tiny dreamwidth community has been cannibalized" still does not mean "nobody in the modern age has been cannibalized" no matter how much you want it to mean that. it means that in all statistical likelihood, because this is a community of about 1k people, nobody has experience with that
this is misplaced outrage the likes of which that post about slutshaming alexander hamilton can't even touch
can you verify that? with proof? that no one on dw has been or has had a family member or friend have anything to do with cannibalism? no, you can't. you can spout statistical averages all you want, but fact is, shit happens to people and you don't know for sure, so it's just polite to warn, both for gore, which people dislike, and cannibalism, which people also dislike. you are literally having an argument about the validity about having to trigger warn for something as opposed to content warning. 'because no one could be triggered because lol cannibalism'.
fuck off. stop trying to defend your right to how offensive you can be because of statistics.
fuck off. stop trying to defend your right to how offensive you can be because of statistics.
no, found the dyke who's fucking sick of hearing straight girls whine about how ~judged~ they feel for flicking it to m/m.
you are literally having an argument about the validity about having to trigger warn for something
you are literally under the impression that imaginary cannibalism victims within the dreamwidth roleplay community need you to heroically stand up for them, which i guess they can't now that armin meiwes has clearly had his way with them
you are literally under the impression that imaginary cannibalism victims within the dreamwidth roleplay community need you to heroically stand up for them, which i guess they can't now that armin meiwes has clearly had his way with them
yes, because we all know that unless something is said very explicitly, there is no such thing as implication or speaking from a particular viewpoint that is exclusive of others.
nope. has to be said flat out.
nope. has to be said flat out.
you're not funny. if that baffles you, i think you need a strong dose of self-awareness.
oh my god girls you're both ugly
now can y'all shut up
now can y'all shut up
i actually stan a lot of the mcu women and i don't even bother with sharon
she's so boring and such a peggy stand-in she isn't worth it`
she's so boring and such a peggy stand-in she isn't worth it`
and i've said repeatedly that it might just be about a squick. people don't get oviposited on a daily basis, yet we tw for that. along with a host of other things. this. this is what tipped you over the edge.
Page 30 of 165
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- 134
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- 140
- 141
- 142
- 143
- 144
- 145
- 146
- 147
- 148
- 149
- 150
- 151
- 152
- 153
- 154
- 155
- 156
- 157
- 158
- 159
- 160
- 161
- 162
- 163
- 164
- 165
- »
Page 30 of 165