Vault101's guide to gender debates

[Colour Scientist]

However, in a case where the sex is consensual, the mother doesn't want to have the child but the father is perfectly willing to take sole custody, is fit to be a single parent, and provide momentary compensation for any inconvenience involved with the pregnancy, shouldn't he at least have a say with what happens to the child?

Have a say?

By that you mean force a woman to carry an unwanted child to term in her womb? I wouldn't refer to that as an 'inconvenience'.

Speaking of rape, false rape allegations from women towards men are at an all time high despite documented cases of rape being at an all time low.[footnote]Just so I can cover as many bases as possible, I realize there have been quite a few controversies involving a male rapist with a certain amount of fame and/or the right connections able to cover up their rape, but I'd argue there's nothing separating it from regular corruption being used to cover up a crime.[/footnote] And even if a man manages to provide enough proof disputing such allegations it's almost impossible for their reputation not to be tarnished in some significant way (college is especially bad since they can pretty much expel you without compensation just for the accusation).

Citation plz.

 

[CymbaIine]

Snip

It's clear to me that this is going to get us nowhere. I don't have the energy to argue each point, obviously I disagree. Basically I will sum it up with - yes in some exceptional circumstances (exceptional meaning not the norm) there are ways in which men suffer that directly benefits women. Just because they are rare cases does not mean that it's okay however I would say those more common and (mostly) more serious issues I listed should be at the forefront of any mens rights activism, and they are not. The obvious reason for this is that mens rights activists and those condemning feminism as bad for men are far less interested in saving lives and more interested in curbing womens rights.

As somebody who nearly died not once but twice giving birth I am sure you can guess what I think about your opinion on the "inconvenience" of pregnancy and birth.

 

[geK0]

what with feminazis changing the law and controlling the government,

Sorry but this actually made me laugh, you sound so paranoid! x D

 

[CymbaIine]

So you're telling me that it would be such a strain on the average woman to go through a pregnancy of an unwanted child that they couldn't possibly be provided an adequate amount of money along with any and all medical expenses being covered just so the Father of the child could raise it? How about this scenario then: what if a couple decide to have a child but the mother changes her mind during the pregnancy but the father does not. Does he still have absolutely no say on the matter? I just think there should be at least SOME say in the manner.

You can't have SOME say because pregnancy is a binary state, there is no compromise.

Pregnancy isn't a joke, it changes your body permanently and there are many serious life threatening risks some of which cannot be detected before they are at crisis point.

 

[JimB]

Please don't give my words meaning you want to see in them.

I am giving guesses in order to provide some kind of framework so I could get an answer to the question I asked, which I now have. Thank you for that.

Let's be honest though, isn't it a tad unfair that men have absolutely no say in the potential life or death of their child?

Yes, but it's an inherently unfair situation, and the man having no say is considerably less unfair than a woman having to cede sovereignty over her own body to a man's wishes. Until technology advances to the point when a fetus can be removed from the mother's body without risk to the mother and brought viably to term, and such technology is within the financial means of the father to provide, men are just going to have to accept that once their sperm leaves their dicks, they don't get much say in what happens to it.

However, in a case where the sex is consensual, the mother doesn't want to have the child but the father is perfectly willing to take sole custody, is fit to be a single parent, and provide momentary compensation for any inconvenience involved with the pregnancy, shouldn't he at least have a say with what happens to the child?

Only if the mother grants him one. Otherwise, nope. His right to control anyone's body ends where his own body ends.

 

[Rahkshi500]

Interesting guide, ma'am. Something that I can get behind, but can you(not specifically you, OP. Just the general you.) follow the same guidelines too...? Maybe...? Just a little...?

Anyway... I do agree with the spirit of the points presented in the guideline, but I still find them to be faulty to an extent. But still, point being that this does at least help a lot in being able to make discussions like these better and more reasonable and less toxic, provided in sufficient enough people are able to follow them.

 

[Olas]

I don't know if what I just read was supposed to be an actual guide to gender debates, a feminist critique of gender debates, a satire of a feminist critique of gender debates, a satire on gender debates, or just a comedic pile of nonsense trying to stir up emotions by touching on a heated topic. I could try to counter some of it's arguments, but for all I know that could just be missing the point entirely.

I'm just going to post a picture of Dirty Harry and hope that it fixes everything.

Spoiler

 

[Vault101]

As I was reading this, it was like you were LITERALLY reaching out of my monitor and slapping my face.

that's the idea!

I don't know if what I just read was supposed to be an actual guide to gender debates, a feminist critique of gender debates, a satire of a feminist critique of gender debates, a satire on gender debates, or just a comedic pile of nonsense trying to stir up emotions by touching on a heated topic]

Or all of the above!

....serious answer, I am actually being honest with some of my points

 

[Vault101]

Point 1: acknowledging disparity and blaming someone for causing that disparity are two very different things.

but who's blaming who? because "blame" as far as I'm concerned is not the main aspect of most of these discussions, games who sometimes take it all personally aremissing the point (rule2)

[quote/]Point 2: This makes no sense, nothing balances anything out.[/quote]
people throw thease "counter points" at you as if it does

[quote/]point 3: This is exactly the response people should have! If you want to change things, the best way to do it is to create things. It's not irrelevant, it's you creating things instead of bitching about perfectly good games, which will actually lead to the change you want.[/quote]
you doing EXACTLY what I pointed out in rule 1.....

-stop complaining
-make own games
-???
-profit

the conclusion of your point is for the other person to drop any issue they have and go away, and as I said more often than not its irrelevant


[quote/]There's a difference between lacking something you want and being flawed.[/quote]
most people know this, see my point about GTA


[quote/]When you try to push everything everyone will love when it doesn't add to the story, it's called pandering, and it takes away from the experience. I'm not saying that adding female characters will do this, I'm saying trying to shoehorn in political agendas[/quote]
now youre pulling a rule 3...making up things that are not true


[quote/]including the gender one, takes away from the experience unless said agenda is the heart of the game. Take tomb raider, it had a strong female character, but it didn't try to push an agenda,[/quote]
Female characters = Adgendas?

wrong.....so wrong


[quote/]just tell a story and provide an engaging experience,[/quote]
I never considered that, I was too busy planning the agdenda[sarcasm


[quote/]and that's what made it great! Imagine how much tomb raider would have suffered if Laura stopped every 5 minutes to whine about how the patriarchy was oppressing her and how all men are rapists.[/quote]
you are rule 3-ing SO HARD right now


[quote/]Not as good. This is what I want to avoid. I want good games, I want more games with strong female characters, what I don't want is shoehorned political messages in games that are about something unrelated to that and having potentially great games ruined by too much preachy crap where it doesn't belong.[/quote]
so SO hard

am I dismissing your points based on my arbitrary rules? YES I am...but that was kind of the point, you didn't tackle them, you just fulfilled them

 

[Ikaruga33]

Isn't just a bit egotistical to name the thread after yourself?

 

[Vault101]

So you're just going to assume every single person on the sjw/feminist side has pure intentions?

*BUUUUUZZZZZZ*

RULE 4! AND RULE 3 double whammy!

ok let me exaplin why I put thrase down as "rules" again. By using the terms SJW/Feminist you've put people into convinent boxes while at the same time making a point based on jumps of logic that have no actual grounding in reality

-by labelling people as part of a fictional "Sjw/feminist" movement and taking it upon yourself to decide what their views are and dismiss them as such

-by coming to the really bizarre conclusion that apparently I assume everyone part of this fictional movment is somehow "good"...uh..wut? that's a prime example of "us vs them"

[quote/]Zoe Quin. You're wrong. Sorry. I could make an arbitrary rule saying vault101's opinion is always wrong, and you'd have no way to combat that arbitrary rule too.[/quote]

to put it bluntly I designed thease "rules" to cut out the Bullshit...which was what you were doing up there,

NO they are not "actual" rules nor are they infallible...it was to have people step back and THINK about why they make the points they make, could they make an argument without falling back on them?

 

[Vault101]

I really, really couldn't care less about semantics. Whatever you want to call [b/]the people who complain about games because they have a white male protagonist, or see it as a flaw, or want to ban fanservice, or otherwise want to push a political agenda over just relaxing and having fun, or over creating content, whatever you want to call those people, i'll call them that.[/b]

[quote/]people who do things for reasons I have eather made up and exaggerated[/quote]
or to put it another way....straw manning

this isn't semantics



[quote/]Fact is, you see this as a conspiracy theory, when the zoe quin thing just came out to prove there is merit to all these concerns is just you putting your fingers in your ears to drown out facts you don't want to hear.[/quote]
I don't rule 3 myself...no

[quote/]Also if your rules are not infallible, they're not rules, and they're basically just empty statements nobody should listen to if they can't hold water under scrutiny.[/quote]
1.its funny how I just said that

2.you didn't actually scrutinise them....you walked right in and emulated them, your arguments are the exact kind I'm talking about

[quote/] and it seems to not have occurred to you to speak with your wallet, and not financially support games that don't meet your standards. If you really want to get things done, telling people how to debate on a public forum when you yourself have a dog in the race is a completely worthless thing to do.[/quote]
1. point I made about GTA

2. your pulling a variation of rule 1 "stop complaining and go away"