# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## Fvcking idiots

Mundane & Pointless Stuff I Must Share: The Off Topic Forum

Moderator: Moderators

Locked

- Print view

32 posts

- 1
- 2
- Next

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

### Fvcking idiots

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:22 am

Correctly labeling someone is not an attack.

> Wikipedia wrote:The argumentum ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue

Pointing out that someone has a male privilege in a male-dominated group in a male-dominated society is not an attack. It's pointing out the obvious.

> Ganbare Gincun wrote:

> > Crissa wrote:What ad-hominem attacks did I lob? At you? What the hell?

> My bad, Crissa. I thought you were lumping me in with the privileged set. If that was not your intention, then I apologize for the misunderstanding.

It's not an attack. Calling you a snotty brat is an attack. Pointing out that your privilege is showing is like pointing out your pants are unzipped. It's pointing out the obvious.
And even so, I wasn't actually arguing that you - or even Kaelik - had a position or viewpoint by association. I was pointing out the association.
-Crissa
Top

CatharzGodfoot
  King
  Posts: 5668
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: North Carolina

###

Post by CatharzGodfoot » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:10 am

Repeating the same argument over and over won't magically cause people who didn't believe it to suddenly wake up to the truth. It will just cause sane people to ignore you and insane people to keep arguing forever.
I'm not saying that you're wrong to point out or decry Male, White, or Straight privileges. Just that you could do a better job of choosing your battles.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:18 am

You're right, of course. Which is why I've tried to avoid it. If you counted posts discussing the issue, you'd find more from Kaelik than I.
Which is horribly frustrating.
-Crissa
Top

Zinegata
  Prince
  Posts: 4071
  Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:33 am

###

Post by Zinegata » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:25 am

Crissa, stop fishing for sympathy.
You're not sympathetic. At all.
Last edited by Zinegata on Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top

Kaelik
  ArchDemon of Rage
  Posts: 14491
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Kaelik » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:27 am

> Crissa wrote:You're right, of course. Which is why I've tried to avoid it. If you counted posts discussing the issue, you'd find more from Kaelik than I.
> Which is horribly frustrating.
> -Crissa

I don't know how you think that's even possible when every single post I've ever made about the subject has been a response to you.
As for your actual topic, Crissa, let's try this one more time:
When someone says that you are wrong to call them on being male privileged in a specific situation, it's not because they de jure object to the existence of male privilege, it's because they disagree with you about whether the thing you are talking about is or is not privilege.
The way you convince someone that a specific thing is an example of X is not to repeatedly assert that X exists and that Y is X. It's to present some form of actual argument why Y is X, something you steadfastly refuse to do, because you always insist that everyone else take all your assertions as absolutely true.
Probably because you are privileged. Richy.
Last edited by Kaelik on Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

> DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?

The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Top

Count Arioch the 28th
  King
  Posts: 6172
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Count Arioch the 28th » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:43 am

You know, it only took me one pity thread for me to learn it doesn't get the results I wanted. I can think of three other threads just like this that Crissa started, and didn't get the results she wanted (unless she's got that mental thing my ex-wife had where she gets off on people abusing her. In that case, eww.)
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:35 am

I'm pretty good at ignoring the flames, Count. Besides, it gives them a place to black their own eyes without getting in trouble for derailing a thread.
Also, fbmf get annoyed if I report posts too often.
-Crissa
Top

Maj
  Prince
  Posts: 4705
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Shelton, Washington, USA

###

Post by Maj » Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:57 am

> Crissa wrote:Correctly labeling someone is not an attack.

I think you should very carefully consider what you're saying here because it will backfire on you - guaranteed.
Claiming that the labeling of people as sexist, privileged, white males isn't an attack because it's "correct" is pretty much like saying that calling you a stupid, lying bitch isn't an attack because it's also "correct."
Using inflammatory speech - regardless of its veracity - will cause flames. Justifying your own inflammatory speech against others will result in a backdraft.
My son makes me laugh. Maybe he'll make you laugh, too.
Top

Count Arioch the 28th
  King
  Posts: 6172
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Count Arioch the 28th » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:07 am

> Maj wrote: Claiming that the labeling of people as sexist, privileged, white males isn't an attack because it's "correct" is pretty much like saying that calling you a stupid, lying bitch isn't an attack because it's also "correct."

Indeed.
(Note: the following is not meant as an attack on anyone I mention, my apologies in advance if I offend anyone)
I know that Crissa thinks calling someone a privileged white male is "correct". I also know that Kaelik, Maj, and Zinegata think it's "correct" that Crissa's a stupid, lying, bitch (guys, if that isn't a correct conclusion feel free to correct me on that). And all people involved feel that the data they have observed confirms that they are all right.
Where is the line drawn? Why is it "okay" for Crissa to say things that she thinks are correct, but not for people Crissa disagrees with to say what they feel is "correct"?
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:30 am

Except, Maj, you're a vindictive, patriarchal stooge. Only a stooge would make the argument that it's an attack to point out that someone is privileged, racist, or sexist. You take the freedoms given to you by activists and then shit on their activism.
Of course, while you say I lie, I might point out that you still don't have a link or proof for that. I have been mistaken at times, but that is not a lie. Everyone is wrong once in awhile.
Why is it okay? It's not, really. Unless you're on the wrong end of things. Which means, fucking learn about privilege first.
-Crissa
Top

Kaelik
  ArchDemon of Rage
  Posts: 14491
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Kaelik » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:32 am

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I also know that Kaelik, Maj, and Zinegata think it's "correct" that Crissa's a stupid, lying, bitch (guys, if that isn't a correct conclusion feel free to correct me on that).

Sometimes she can be bitchy, and in those situations it is correct to call her a bitch, but mostly she is just stupid. When she's not actively lying about what other people have said, she's usually not being a bitch. It's bitchy to lie and claim I've encouraged other posters to drive women out of TGD. It's just good debate tactics to lie about what she said when she realizes her previous comments are retarded.

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Where is the line drawn? Why is it "okay" for Crissa to say things that she thinks are correct, but not for people Crissa disagrees with to say what they feel is "correct"?

Because Crissa is always right. And you can know this because all you have to do is ask her, and she'll tell you, and since she's always right, you can know it's true.

> DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?

The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Top

PoliteNewb
  Duke
  Posts: 1053
  Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:23 am
  Location: Alaska
  Contact:
  Contact PoliteNewb
  Website

###

Post by PoliteNewb » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:45 am

In order for calling someone "racist", "sexist", or "privileged" to be correct (meaning objectively factual), you must be able to define those things, and it must be clear that the person/behavior in question meets that definition.
So start at the beginning: Crissa, can you please define racist, sexist, and privileged? And is your definition a universally accepted one?
(incidentally, I have no problem when someone points out my privilege...in fact, it's usually helpful, because the whole nature of privilege dictates that it's mostly invisible to those who have it. So like Crissa said, it's just someone pointing out your fly is down or your bra strap is showing...it's not a moral judgement, it's a suggestion that you examine yourself.
I DO have a problem when someone accuses me of being racist or sexist, but can't or won't point out specifically in what way I have been racist or sexist, or when I disagree about what is or is not racist or sexist. Because that usually comes down to disagreements in definitions or base premises, and I refuse to accept that I am racist/sexist merely because somebody else says I am.)
Last edited by PoliteNewb on Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Ganbare Gincun
  Duke
  Posts: 1022
  Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:42 am

###

Post by Ganbare Gincun » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:49 am

If complaining about how crazy nerd girls can be in an effort to advise ubernoob about the world of pain that he is very likely about to enter makes me "privileged", someone needs to hook me up with a McMansion and an investment banking job ASAP, because I'm not feeling a whole hell of a lot of "privilege" over here.
EDIT: To be fair, my avatar *does* have a top hat and the monocle. So yeah, I can see how that may have generated some confusion.
Last edited by Ganbare Gincun on Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:50 am

PS, it's not terribly hard to find evidence of Kaelik being a dick to a specific newbie.
Nor is it hard to find a primer on sexism on the internet.
-Crissa
Top

Count Arioch the 28th
  King
  Posts: 6172
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Count Arioch the 28th » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:20 am

Bad example on the Kaelik link, also that was over a year ago.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:22 am

Well, you'd have to read through the thread to find him specifically cheering Roy on, but the point stands that he did do it. I'm not lying about it. There was an episode more recently, as well.
But I did take him off ignore, so yeah, he's gotten better.
-Crissa
Top

Count Arioch the 28th
  King
  Posts: 6172
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Count Arioch the 28th » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:28 am

So? At one point Kaelik was shoved head-first through someone's vagina too, but I don't bring it up during arguments with him.
There are two types of people: People that have said stupid things they regretted when they learned better later on, and people that don't grow or learn at all. I am pretty much content with judging people by what they are doing right now rather than what happened way back when.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Top

Kaelik
  ArchDemon of Rage
  Posts: 14491
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Kaelik » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:39 am

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:So? At one point Kaelik was shoved head-first through someone's vagina too, but I don't bring it up during arguments with him.

Fuck you, I was breach, I've been an asshole since before I was born.

> Crissa wrote:Well, you'd have to read through the thread to find him specifically cheering Roy on, but the point stands that he did do it. I'm not lying about it. There was an episode more recently, as well.

Crissa, why do you have to lie so much? Is it perhaps because you are just wrong?
You can read through that entire thread, and read both of my posts, neither of which was cheering Roy on. Both of which consisted of me mocking someone who was wrong.
Hilariously, even when I call you on your lie, you still resort to linking to a thread, and then claiming that I did it later on at a different point than your link, because it didn't fucking happen.
To say nothing of your backpedalling from "encouraged other posters to drive women away" to "Cheered Roy on when he had already started attacking (which FYI is not driving away) one specific person who's gender was immaterial (and apparently unknown)."
But sure, get on the bicycle and pedal backwards as fast as you can. Because your initial lie was pretty fucking stupidly obviously wrong, so you can't get much worse.
Last edited by Kaelik on Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

> DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?

The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:04 am

People can get worse, too, Count. Progress is unfortunately not linear regarding learning.
-Crissa
Top

Maj
  Prince
  Posts: 4705
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Shelton, Washington, USA

###

Post by Maj » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:58 am

> Crissa wrote:Except, Maj, you're a vindictive, patriarchal stooge.

What on earth makes me vindictive? The fact the other people actually do call you things like stupid and a bitch and I'm trying to warn you that your own argument is going to be used against you in order to justify that behavior?

> Crissa wrote:Only a stooge would make the argument that it's an attack to point out that someone is privileged, racist, or sexist.

The way you do it? Calling someone sexist for using words like hysterical and bitch? It's one thing to recognize sexism in, say, Mormonism. There's a lot of it there. But it's completely and utterly ruinous to the cause, so to speak, to equate that kind of sexism with calling someone a bitch.
I personally feel that the true injustice to feminism (or any other -ism's cause) is in nit-picking every little detail so that the message - the whole issue you are fighting for - gets completely swallowed in petty semantic arguments.

> Crissa wrote:You take the freedoms given to you by activists and then shit on their activism.

You know what... Whether what you say is true or not is completely irrelevant because it's now my right.

> Crissa wrote:Of course, while you say I lie, I might point out that you still don't have a link or proof for that.

Do I say you lie? If I do, do I say it without cause or reference?
I try to make a very strong point of not calling people names because I think it's rude and because writing on the internet is forever. I don't want people thinking that I have the manners of a newt (sorry, newts). Now, sometimes my fingers get the better of me, and sometimes what I say might hit a touchy spot, but I think you'll have a very difficult time finding examples of me slinging insults at you.
My son makes me laugh. Maybe he'll make you laugh, too.
Top

Count Arioch the 28th
  King
  Posts: 6172
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Count Arioch the 28th » Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:04 am

I see lots of times when Crissa is throwing fits about what Maj is saying that I can't identify the reason why Crissa would be so upset.
I seem to remember that since Maj and Crissa went at it about some place in Washington state, Crissa wants to be a Giant Chicken to Maj's Peter Griffin. I don't even remember who took what side, because I don't really put a lot of thought into Forks, WA.
Don't get me wrong, Maj has pissed me off several times. I don't hold it against her unless she's doing something to piss me off right now, I have trouble holding grudges and don't quite understand when people hold them against others, I find it puzzling.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Top

Kaelik
  ArchDemon of Rage
  Posts: 14491
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

Post by Kaelik » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:07 pm

You know what, since anyone who is reading this thread clearly loves train wrecks, I'm going to go ahead and just continue to call Crissa on her bullshit.
Let's look at both my posts in the thread where I "Encouraged other posters to drive women away, I mean, cheered Roy on while he drove women away, well, a woman, well, not because of her gender, well, he was attacking her because she likes 4e, not because she's a women, and he wasn't driving her away."
First post:

> Kaelik wrote:Wow, I've never seen such a huge dick in my life.
> You are so full of Strawmen that I can only assume you actually shit actual straw.
> And to say it all with that condescending tone as you lie through your teeth. It's simply amazing.

Okay, so here I:
1) Call someone a dick.
2) Point out that they are Strawmanning.
3) Point out their condescending tone.
4) Call them a liar.
Now, why do I call them a dick and liar? Is it because of their gender? No, it seems to be because I disagree with their claims about what Denners are actually arguing.
Second Post, bold added now to make a point and prove even more how stupid Crissa is:

> Kaelik wrote:

> > violence in the media wrote:3. You state that you got great ideas about how to divvy up treasure parcels by delving the forums here after staking out your position as an immersive roleplayer? Are you fucking kidding me? What the hell is wrong with you?

> I believe his actual point is that the rules* don't say you can't include stuff not on the list** and so therefore all the stuff that we complained the rules don't actually let you pick up*** he is going to include in treasure parcels. PROVING US ALL WRONG!!!111one11!!1
> In other words: "The rules don't say you can't so you can."
> *AKA the list of appropriate treasures to give
> ** Well technically they don't. They also don't say you can't make up your own Wizard powers that do 400d6 damage on an at will. But they do say you can pick your Wizard powers from the appropriate lists, and they do say you can pick treasure parcels from the appropriate lists.
> *** Because they don't

So here I attempt to rephrase the person's argument, and in the process, mock it, because it's a terrible argument.
Also, I seem to be under the impression they are male.
So what can we determine from this:
Things Kaelik did not do:
1) Drive away women.
2) Drive away a woman.
3) Encourage other people to drive away women.
4) Encourage other people to drive away a woman.
5) Cheer Roy on while he drove away women.
6) Cheer Roy on while he drove away a woman.
7) Cheer Roy on at all.
Things Kaelik did do:
1) Address the flaws in someone's argument.
2) Call that person a liar and dick.
Now, I'm going to go out on a limb and say with some certainty that we can tell from these posts that I would have responded identically to a male making these posts.
So now that we know that literally everything Crissa claimed I did earlier is false:
Crissa, how does me insulting both the arguments and personage of a male poster demonstrate male privilege?
You have three options here:
1) Not answer this question, because you are wrong, and you know it.
2) Answer the fucking question, so I can mock your stupid answer, and everyone else can see what stupid lengths you will go to to label anything or one you don't like sexist or male privilege.
3) Attempt to sideline away from answering this question because you know you are wrong. The most obvious one that you would normally attempt would be to claim that the fact that I assumed the poster to be male demonstrates my male privilege, but since I am specifically calling it out, you should probably pick something else, since I am already prepared for that sideline.

> DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?

The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Top

For Valor
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 529
  Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:31 pm

###

Post by For Valor » Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:08 pm

Kaelik = The win.

> Mask wrote:And for the love of all that is good and unholy, just get a fucking hippogrif mount and pretend its a flying worg.

Top

Crissa
  King
  Posts: 6720
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Santa Cruz

###

Post by Crissa » Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:42 pm

Uhh, no. Calling someone names, while they're being attacked here and there by Roy is cheering on Roy's behavior. It's called enabling.
Kaelik is just demonstrating how he 'responds' to my posts by posting more on a subject than I did. What he did here is called a 'simple refutation', as in, saying 'nuh-uh, didn't do it.' Then he brought up a series of topics which are irrelevant to this thread, or his actions then. Kaelik even quoted a different post than the one linked to.
-Crissa
Top

For Valor
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 529
  Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:31 pm

###

Post by For Valor » Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:15 pm

No, the first quote Kaelik put up there was the one you linked.
So get over yourself. Kaelik has delivered a smashing victory.

> Mask wrote:And for the love of all that is good and unholy, just get a fucking hippogrif mount and pretend its a flying worg.

Top
Locked

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

32 posts

- 1
- 2
- Next

Return to “MPSIMS”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS