Riot Games Gaffe Results in Sexism Allegations at Pax West 2018

[Valantar]

At what point is there concrete, actual discrimination occurring? Your argument seems to be against public perceptions, which women (and men) voluntarily buy into.

Just because discrimination is systemic and largely ingrained into society in such a way as to make it nigh-on invisible doesn't mean it doesn't happen, or that protesting it is somehow bad. You seem to be arguing that "public perceptions" somehow can't be bad, which I'd like to have you make sense of for me. Also, saying we "voluntarily buy into" values and beliefs that we're exposed to from a very early age is a rather naive stance.

People with birth defects, genetic disorders are one thing... if you're born a man you're a man, if you're born a woman you're a woman. You can be an effeminate man or a masculine woman, you can be gay, you can't change what you are.

And how, exactly, do you define if you're "born a man" or a woman? Chromosomes? That would be interesting, 'cause chromosomal tests are never done on new-born babies. They are assigned a gender by sight by the attending doctor. You'd also be surprised by the amount of newborns subjected to "gender-confirming" surgery - essentially genital mutilation - both historically and today. As for the chromosomal definition, you should look into the variability of chromosomes, such as XXY males. The point being: biology is not - ever - a straight-forward, black-and-white thing. Acknowledging that is a rather fundamental requirement to moving beyond oversimplified, biologically deterministic views on sex and gender.

I find it funny how expressing opinions is generally not allowed--unless you're a minority. Also, expressing facts is extremely not allowed--no matter what.

...and the people are calling those speaking up for increased diversity snowflakes? Wow. Has your opinion been censored? How? When? And what facts are you not allowed to present?

I have no idea. Those groups seem to go through terminology like they go through underwear. I'm all for everybody's rights to do/be/feel whatever they want (so long as it doesn't step on someone else's, of course) but I don't even know what half of these words mean anymore.

I think non-binary means non-conformist but non-conformist in regards to what?

While the philosophical debates on how gender is constructed, portrayed and performed are indeed extremely complex (as is fitting for such a fundamental aspect of our cultures), this is actually quite simple. "Binary gender" is the belief that there are two, and only two possible genders a person can have. Most of society is and has historically been organized around this (although there are quite a few notable historical departures from this). It's usually legitimized through biology, but when looking at actual facts, that's a very, very shaky basis - especially as the strict social limitations on how you can look, act, dress and so on don't have any link to biological sex whatsoever, and are ultimately completely arbitrary. Non-binary thus simply means someone who doesn't feel like they fit within either of these two definitions, and thus want to define for themselves how they want to look, act and portray themselves - regardless of societal expectations of them being "male" or "female". Given how limiting the binary gender system is to the freedom of all involved (this system exposes men to just as much internal justice as women, after all, and the gender policing of men is generally violent and hateful), I see this as a very good development towards a more free society.

Ignoring the copius amounts of ignorance and bullshit in that statement, and lets pretend the "industry" only exists in the western hemisphere and western europe, the reason probably is the gross percentage of people applying themselves to get to the level to compete at those levels are straight white men.

I can't be bothered to repeat myself, so:

... And how much of that can be attributed to the industry and related fields of study systematically excluding women for decades? Computer science was nearly all-female in the early days, until men realized software was as interesting as hardware (instead of boring "secretarial work" which it had been seen as until then), shut them out of schools and jobs (again: hiring bias is very real, and was far worse 20-30+ years ago, but even today men tend to overwhelmingly hire men, while hiring done by women is statistically far more evenly distributed), and started a decades-long push to give programming a masculine image. Interest isn't something you're born with, and the current demographic distribution among programmers isn't some spontaneous, "natural" happening. Nor is it "planned" in the sense that one person or a single group of people conspired to make it happen, but there has been exerted considerable effort and power by many, many people over these past decades towards promoting computer science and programming as a "male" activity.

Let me explain this in terms cake. If the only cakes available are Vanila, or Chocolate and someone doesn't enjoy them because they prefer some purple whatever, nondescript-flavored cake, that person has no right to complain or protest they can go bake their own cake. But ofc ppl choose to complain because that is much easier than working toward actual constructive change.

Ah, I do love when people present oversimplified arguments. First off: to make this realistic, you'd have to say that the people currently making only vanilla or chocolate cakes control the vast majority of access to baking ingredients and investment/funding to start bakeries. Secondly, you're entirely ignoring the fact that actual, clear-cut, obvious, not-up-for-discussion discrimination has been rampant in this industry for years and years. This includes education, where people are taught how to ... bake. But this is classic conservative argumentation, entirely ignoring that people have different starting points in life and that inherent systematic bias in society gives some people preferential treatment simply because they were born into the right group. Attempting to level the playing field for those starting at a severe disadvantage does not in any way harm those who start at an advantage. Being treated as equals is not harm; losing privilege is not harm - it's fair. More to the point, if not being given preferential treatment is harmful, then you're actively admitting that anyone not a white, straight male has been systematically harmed up until now. Which is kind of the whole point?

Arguing against myself. And then you go and literally go and argue against yourself...

a) There are tons of highly iconic female characters in games and movies, but as we all know it, you all conveniently insist on ignoring them to fit your narrative.

Wait, did I say that there were no female protagonists? Oh, sorry, that was a straw man argument, sorry for not letting that one pass. Stop accusing me of saying things I haven't said.

b) Who gives a shit if they are openly gay non binary hermaphrodites, just imagine it yourself that they are. How the hell I played through Alien:Isolation imagining I'm Amanda Ripley. While being a dude. Mind blowing, right?

Yeah, I agree, imagination and oppositional readings are both good and necessary when interacting with media. However, is it fair or natural that >50% of the population should (nearly) always be forced into this to see themselves represented in the media they love?

c) 90% of characters used to be male white characters because that was the largest audience in the beginning and because of technical limitations. If you look games from the past, literally all enemies were male and they looked exactly like the protagonist himself. Guess what, technology. They couldn't afford to make 50 different models and paint them with 50 different textures each. It's also ironic when diversity folks want more female characters as NPC's and then cry misogyny when you shoot them. But are fine when we mow down thousands of male characters. It's just so ironic and funny it makes me roll on the ground and laugh like a madman.

Wait, so ever since ... say, 1997, there's been an even distribution of genders in game characters? 'Cause that's about the time when those technical limitations were gone for good. As for your argument about who is shot, I agree with you to a certain extent (at least as long as the women are portrayed as equally capable of fighting back as the men). You should look into the skin colors of in-game enemies, though. "Surprisingly" (yeah, not really), there's a massive disparity between the skin colors of "heroes" and "villains" through games history. I'm not "fine" with games portraying senseless violence of any kind (not least because those games tend to be incredibly boring and infantilizing towards the player while promoting dubious ideologies and ideas), and the systematic portrayal of men as ultra-violent macho idiots is deeply problematic.

d) "used to be reserved for the dirty nerds coz it was too childish, but now everyone wants to have a pie" And here is the usual case of people yet again not understanding the context of words where I literally called myself " dirty nerd"... No one is stealing my toys, I was stating that gaming was considered as something negative in the past and quite frankly, in my country still is. If you say you're a gamer in your 30's they'll consider you childish. And that wasn't any different when I was 15 or 20... We just had our hobby and we had fun in it not really giving two fucks about anything other than having fun and doing crazy shit. And now the Diversity Squad arrived and wants their BS shoved in with full force. That was the statement I made. But you just proved me right by arguing with yourself and stating like someone is stealing my toys. It's not "stealing my games" as much as it's "ruining the games" diversity garbage is screwing up the games because people who demand diversity have no concept of designing games. They just shove in some gay shit totally out of context and call it a day. Like in Mass Effect Andromeda where character first introduces itself and then in the same sentence states it's gay. Do you ever introduce yourself to someone with first sentence about your sexual orientation? Give me a break. And that's just the most obvious example. They are just obsessed with shoving their diversity nonsense in for the sake of having it in. God forbid someone would actually take great care to craft a complex story that potentially includes that. No, just throw it in there flat on the face. Only thing selfish is expecting quality from games and they are trading it for diversity points. A checklist of what all skin colors, sexual orientations and 700 trillion genders they can tick off.

I did understand that you were calling yourself a "dirty nerd", but I didn't address that at all, as I didn't really see it as important. For the rest of your post: I'm sorry that you have to live in a society where your passion is seen as less legitimate than those of other people. It seems that culture has a ways to go in terms of appreciation of art and media.

But to your claims of people "ruining your games" because "people who demand diversity have no concept of designing games", well, again, that's demonstrably not true. It's actually very funny that you use a Mass Effect game as an example, given that that series has always had gay or non-straight characters. That the last chapter was rather poorly written doesn't change that, but makes it entirely unusable for the argument you want to use it for. Do you have any other examples? Also, have you considered that you might have some bias towards this, making you see this as less integrated into the gameworld or story than it actually is? I'm not saying this is the case, but it would be a good thing to look into nonetheless.

e) The hiring bias has come so far that companies now hire women for the sake of diversity and diversity quotas even if they had a far more qualified man applying for the position as well. Yay, great win for diversity, hiring people because vagina! Also, lets just entirely dismiss the fact that more men apply for mathematics and programming and as a result, more men will end up working in such positions. I just love it how no one ever demands 50% diversity quotas by filling in positions with women and non-binary snowflakes in the ranks of garbage collectors, sewer maintenance, electrical engineers working on high voltage power lines, dep earth miners, oil rig workers and construction site workers. Oh, but that's just inconvenient because they are all nasty dirty jobs and men can do them and no one gives a damn about diversity, but we'll save the nice clean air conditioned jobs for the womynz because yay, diversity everyone! It makes me vomit.

Hm. First off, can you show me an actual example of what you're saying? Because otherwise, you're just spouting conspiracy theories. Having diversity as one of the desired factors when hiring someone does not equate to passing over better-qualified straight white male candidates in the vast majority of cases. Of course, this is without getting into how bias makes men generally look more competent than women, gives them better opportunities to improve their resumes, and so on. Point being: correcting for systematic discrimination takes an effort, as it is a deep-seated and difficult-to-identify issue, with no clear or obvious fixes. Attempting to solve it does nobody a disservice. Besides, at least here in Norway, there has been quite a lot of effort put into diversifying the jobs you mention here too. Perhaps not trash collectors in specific, but this general type of "nasty dirty job".


But that's enough of a wall of text for today. Sheesh.

 

[oxidized]

I suggest you do some homework. It's fact.

Care to help a bit? I really fail to see how that is possible, but if you have some actual source on this, i'm glad to learn something.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I suggest you do some homework. It's fact.

Gotta agree here. Biologically, there are only two genders. The human mental perspective is based on that and to varying degrees there are alterations, but in the end that is what we are, one or the other. The redefinitions of such by parts of society that do not understand disorder/dysfunction which causes confusion have in recent decades brought about the sociological questioning we see today. However in the end, biology wins. We are a species comprised of only two genders, no more, no less. Regardless of how many members of society want that fact to change, it will not.

The point being: biology is not - ever - a straight-forward, black-and-white thing.

Oh yes it is. Chromosomal variabilities are historically rare. They have only increased because of pollutants introduced into the environment by the activities of humanity, such as chemicals that do not occur in nature and massive amounts of radiation from nuclear activities that would normally not be present.

 

[RejZoR]

@Valantar
"Hm. First off, can you show me an actual example of what you're saying? Because otherwise, you're just spouting conspiracy theories. "

Dude, this is literally a known fact that "progressive" companies have diversity quotas. If you look at their departments roster and if you see "Diversity Department" or a "Diversity Officer" you can bet your ass they have that shit. Even if it's not internally, they do it to score brownie points with the Starbucks sipping blue haired crowd because they can then brag about it how diverse and inclusive they are. No one ever held women or minorities or black people out of anything. They simply weren't applying for those positions in large enough numbers as it's proven by all the people who tick these boxes and have been a part of gaming industry for decades before this diversity nonsense blew out on all ends.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

***Drama***

Fixed. Enuff said.

Wait, so ever since ... say, 1997, there's been an even distribution of genders in game characters? 'Cause that's about the time when those technical limitations were gone for good. As for your argument about who is shot, I agree with you to a certain extent (at least as long as the women are portrayed as equally capable of fighting back as the men). You should look into the skin colors of in-game enemies, though. "Surprisingly" (yeah, not really), there's a massive disparity between the skin colors of "heroes" and "villains" through games history. I'm not "fine" with games portraying senseless violence of any kind (not least because those games tend to be incredibly boring and infantilizing towards the player while promoting dubious ideologies and ideas), and the systematic portrayal of men as ultra-violent macho idiots is deeply problematic.

Game development is not as easy as you portray here. its easy to argue for skin color or gender bias, but when push comes to shove, it boils down to Time and Investor input (aka Money). It doesnt occur to people that adding "other" character skins and/or gender adds 10-20% to development costs which is why FPS games were so dominant prior to 2006-ish. So please keep on arguing for character development disparity, its a real game changer. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Vayra86]

Whoever brought this diversity garbage into gaming industry should be hanged by the balls assuming they even have them. No one cares if you're a minority black transgender lesbian with one leg and dyslexia, that literally never was the point of gaming which used to be reserved for the dirty nerds coz it was too childish, but now everyone wants to have a pie of it coz its so fun. I also don't understand why they are obsessed with this notion that characters in games need to be a reflection of our real selves (that pushing for all inclusive disabled transgender female minority protagonists). Someone who has no legs probably appreciates that players in FIFA have a pair of healthy legs so they can run around because they can't in real life. And same goes for this "women and minority only" workshops. You can be dyslexic or missing both legs, but you maybe excel at composing music or doing texture designs. You don't need bloody special workshops. Studio will see your talent past your whatever disability if you prove yourself. And legs aren't mandatory for doing great music or textures or models...

Then again, Riot Games haven't released anything else notable other than LoL which makes it look like they got lucky at doing one thing. And then they'll fall into irrelevancy. This diversity nonsense won't help their case in the long run either...

Winter is coming, snowflakes are everywhere already...

So much this. Thank you. /thread

 

[Totally]

I can't be bothered to repeat myself, so:

And how much of that can be attributed to the industry and related fields of study systematically excluding women for decades? Computer science was nearly all-female in the early days, until men realized software was as interesting as hardware (instead of boring "secretarial work" which it had been seen as until then), shut them out of schools and jobs (again: hiring bias is very real, and was far worse 20-30+ years ago, but even today men tend to overwhelmingly hire men, while hiring done by women is statistically far more evenly distributed), and started a decades-long push to give programming a masculine image. Interest isn't something you're born with, and the current demographic distribution among programmers isn't some spontaneous, "natural" happening. Nor is it "planned" in the sense that one person or a single group of people conspired to make it happen, but there has been exerted considerable effort and power by many, many people over these past decades towards promoting computer science and programming as a "male" activity.

What a hot flaming pile of garbage, I love how you try to rewrite history to suit your argument, these early days you speak of stem from a period there was a huge ass war going on called world war 2, most or all able men were fighting in this war with women filling in the voids. So when the war ended naturally men chose to go back into fields that didn't involve getting shot at and over-time shift from predominantly women to men. That was in the past let's get away from that red herring get back to the present. As for the bolded, OF COURSE Interest isn't something people are born with that is the inherent problem with women in STEM , women aren't generating the same number of applicants as men they are going to be subject to the same standards and not going to get a free pass just because they are women. Show actual numbers where are an equal number of women applicants followed a disparity of those selected to show that there is such a conspiracy.

Ah, I do love when people present oversimplified arguments. First off: to make this realistic, you'd have to say that the people currently making only vanilla or chocolate cakes control the vast majority of access to baking ingredients and investment/funding to start bakeries. Secondly, you're entirely ignoring the fact that actual, clear-cut, obvious, not-up-for-discussion discrimination has been rampant in this industry for years and years. This includes education, where people are taught how to ... bake. But this is classic conservative argumentation, entirely ignoring that people have different starting points in life and that inherent systematic bias in society gives some people preferential treatment simply because they were born into the right group. Attempting to level the playing field for those starting at a severe disadvantage does not in any way harm those who start at an advantage. Being treated as equals is not harm; losing privilege is not harm - it's fair. More to the point, if not being given preferential treatment is harmful, then you're actively admitting that anyone not a white, straight male has been systematically harmed up until now. Which is kind of the whole point?

Do you realize this is an issue of writing right, such education hasn't been denied to anyone in the relevant timeframe so my oversimplified argument still stands as you were not arguing that such content was actually being produced but not being published that would be discrimination. If you want to go ahead and indeed say that is the case I'm going to ask for proof.

The bold shows you are beyond reason. Say I want to be an astronaut there are only but 100 spots open for candidacy for the next mission. 100 applicants are indisputably more qualified than I am placing at 101 how is it fair to give me a spot because I happen to be at whatever disadvantage. How is it fair for one those 100 qualified to lose their spot?

Again with this white male thing have you actually paid attention to esports? It's dominated by Asians, over there the esports scene is many times bigger than NA and Europe combined and in NA there a large number of Chinese teams. The face of esports is an Asian male but for some strange reason you keep saying white.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

While the philosophical debates on how gender is constructed, portrayed and performed are indeed extremely complex (as is fitting for such a fundamental aspect of our cultures), this is actually quite simple. "Binary gender" is the belief that there are two, and only two possible genders a person can have. Most of society is and has historically been organized around this (although there are quite a few notable historical departures from this). It's usually legitimized through biology, but when looking at actual facts, that's a very, very shaky basis - especially as the strict social limitations on how you can look, act, dress and so on don't have any link to biological sex whatsoever, and are ultimately completely arbitrary. Non-binary thus simply means someone who doesn't feel like they fit within either of these two definitions, and thus want to define for themselves how they want to look, act and portray themselves - regardless of societal expectations of them being "male" or "female". Given how limiting the binary gender system is to the freedom of all involved (this system exposes men to just as much internal justice as women, after all, and the gender policing of men is generally violent and hateful), I see this as a very good development towards a more free society.

It's not a "belief," it's XX and XY chromosome pairs which are observed in the entire mammal kingdom. They, in part, control estrogen and testosterone production which lead to many psychological and physiological differences between the two. Sex is binary and always will be but there are always exceptions (tumor on ovary for example can prevent estrogen production, tumor on teste can prevent testosterone production, damaged organ in either case due to whatever reason can result in fewer hormones, etc.). These exceptions are all medical in nature--they don't change sex but can change behavior/appearance over time (e.g. a male with low testosterone in their teens isn't going to act/look very masculine probably for the rest of his life).

The reason why society puts women and men in separate boxes is so that society could survive. It prevents males from killing each over females (thanks to Samuel Colt, humans are really good at killing), it prevents women and children from being abandoned (creates a lot of problems for society) after she has gotten pregnant, it allows society to assign strict punishments for abusing the weaker sex, and it establishes behavioral patterns through generations that become mores (e.g. a male spending excessive time with a non-family female will draw suspicion and ire). In other words, it's tribalism for survival and it is observed in virtually all social mammals. A more "free society" ends up being more dangerous for females because the nature of humanity is rigged against them.

Paraphrasing Nicholas Wade, wanting a non-gendered society is "a matter of principle, not of science."

 

[Vayra86]

Gotta agree here. Biologically, there are only two genders. The human mental perspective is based on that and to varying degrees there are alterations, but in the end that is what we are, one or the other. The redefinitions of such by parts of society that do not understand disorder/dysfunction which causes confusion have in recent decades brought about the sociological questioning we see today. However in the end, biology wins. We are a species comprised of only two genders, no more, no less. Regardless of how many members of society want that fact to change, it will not.


Oh yes it is. Chromosomal variabilities are historically rare. They have only increased because of pollutants introduced into the environment by the activities of humanity, such as chemicals that do not occur in nature and massive amounts of radiation from nuclear activities that would normally not be present.

Well... popular written history says there are but two genders but the fact is that people are born with varying degrees of both genders too. They are exceptions but not as rare as many might think. The inverse is true: many transgenders are "made" to be a boy or girl at birth and it used to be commpn practice to never tell your child this medical treatment had occurred shortly after birth.

That is now changing, awareness is considered of greater value and it explains the 'sudden' rise in attention for varying degrees of male/female traits we all have.

That also provides a new perspective to positive discrimination of gender, I think.

This sounds so much like BS

Its not. Read my story above. Or check some sources. Google indeterminate sex.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_assignment

 

[atomicus]

If you're serious, then yes, completely.

The mere notion that the thought of seriousness would even enter your head is deeply, deeply concerning.

 

[RejZoR]

Well... popular written history says there are but two genders but the fact is that people are born with varying degrees of both genders too. They are exceptions but not as rare as many might think. The inverse is true: many transgenders are "made" to be a boy or girl at birth and it used to be commpn practice to never tell your child this medical treatment had occurred shortly after birth.

That is now changing, awareness is considered of greater value and it explains the 'sudden' rise in attention for varying degrees of male/female traits we all have.

That also provides a new perspective to positive discrimination of gender, I think.

The thing is, there are just 2 genders. And within those 2 you have various degrees of femininity and masculinity. How some women look masculine and men look feminine. But they are still one or the other, it's just aesthetics so to speak. Everything else outside of that are either physical or mental disorders. Of course people will jump on me how dare I say that, but it's just true.

 

[Vayra86]

The thing is, there are just 2 genders. And within those 2 you have various degrees of femininity and masculinity. How some women look masculine and men look feminine. But they are still one or the other, it's just aesthetics so to speak. Everything else outside of that are either physical or mental disorders. Of course people will jump on me how dare I say that, but it's just true.

No, they're not 'still one or the other'. There are people that have lady parts but can't have children because they lack elements of it. And vice versa. Those people will be searching for their true self a whole lifetime and never succeed, until they come to terms with their 'mixed bag' identity. It helps them to know there is not a strict definition of gender, because otherwise they are always going to feel like outcasts.

It is only our society and the way we have created it that creates the discomfort and misunderstanding. Nature is known to create exceptions to the rule - its the way of evolution to 'attempt' different things and see if they stick/survive/thrive or even excel beyond the status quo. It is a very welcome, comforting mechanism because it means humanity will remain versatile.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The mere notion that the thought of seriousness would even enter your head is deeply, deeply concerning.

You never know these days. Some people are very serious about the most ridiculous and disturbing things.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

There are people that have lady parts but can't have children because they lack elements of it. And vice versa.

Those are birth defects.

Those people will be searching for their true self a whole lifetime and never succeed, until they come to terms with their 'mixed bag' identity.

Genetic testing can give a definitive physiological answer. Hormonal testing can give a definitive psychological answer.

It helps them to know there is not a strict definition of gender, because otherwise they are always going to feel like outcasts.

Why are they outcasts? Because natural selection dictates they aren't good reproductive mates. You're asking humans to ignore their nature for the sake of someone else's feelings. The recidivism rate of rapists prove that principle does not trump science.

 

[cdawall]

The company I currently work for has women's meetings that men aren't allowed at, they have a women's summit that again men aren't allowed at.

They also have a diversity summit and meeting that works heavily with inclusion.

What exactly did riot do wrong by trying to get a group into their office that doesn't normally apply?

 

[RejZoR]

No, they're not 'still one or the other'. There are people that have lady parts but can't have children because they lack elements of it. And vice versa. Those people will be searching for their true self a whole lifetime and never succeed, until they come to terms with their 'mixed bag' identity. It helps them to know there is not a strict definition of gender, because otherwise they are always going to feel like outcasts.

It is only our society and the way we have created it that creates the discomfort and misunderstanding. Nature is known to create exceptions to the rule - its the way of evolution to 'attempt' different things and see if they stick/survive/thrive or even excel beyond the status quo. It is a very welcome, comforting mechanism because it means humanity will remain versatile.

Which is what I said. If you look at their chromosomes, they'll still have XX or XY. But if they can't reproduce, that's a disorder of some sort. Which is exactly what I mentioned.

If one has all the physical parts but they feel like the opposite gender (or no gender or whatever), that's a mental disorder. And even trans people who aren't overly sensitive snowflakes agree on that. That doesn't make them bad people, it's just that they have this condition.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

What exactly did riot do wrong by trying to get a group into their office that doesn't normally apply?

What Riot Games did doesn't really fit PAX.

 

[cdawall]

What Riot Games did doesn't really fit PAX.

What my company does, doesn't fit in in the construction field yet we have expanded at a crazy rate year over year.

People just need to get over themselves.

 

[hat]

Which is what I said. If you look at their chromosomes, they'll still have XX or XY. But if they can't reproduce, that's a disorder of some sort. Which is exactly what I mentioned.

Apparently, not so... in an attempt to understand what Valantar said about something, I found this

https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/abnormal/abnormal_5.htm

But those are pretty rare cases, and it seems to have little to do with the thread topic, or, more broadly, this "everybody's included" movement.

 

[RejZoR]

Everybody's included. Except the devil white males...

 

[R-T-B]

Gotta agree here. Biologically, there are only two genders.

When X and Y is not X or Y, that falls apart fast, and it does happen.

If one has all the physical parts but they feel like the opposite gender (or no gender or whatever), that's a mental disorder.

No, it's not. No authority on the matter still lists GID as a "mental disorder." Get your head out of the frickin 70s.

Everybody's included. Except the devil white males...

Dude, don't pretend we don't have it fine. Honestly, it's shameful.

Genetic testing can give a definitive physiological answer. Hormonal testing can give a definitive psychological answer.

For biological gender sure. But for identity? That answer is theirs and theirs alone. Quit trying to take that away.

Care to help a bit? I really fail to see how that is possible, but if you have some actual source on this, i'm glad to learn something.

Google/wikipedia "Indeterminate Gender."

Another proof that America (U.S.A for the rest of the world) it's the Nr.1 most racist and sexist country from all so called 1st and 2nd World Countries.
The retarded idiots promoting "political correctness" are doing more harm than good by involuntary discriminating the races, sexes or sexual orientation.
People never learn I guess...

Honestly, I have been in that culture myself and while it has its faults, I see wayway more discrimination here in the attitudes presented than I ever wanted to see. It's outright painful to me to see.

I find it funny how expressing opinions is generally not allowed--unless you're a minority. Also, expressing facts is extremely not allowed--no matter what.

What? Not my experience at all.

I would caution that those being disruptive about relatively minor things are being proactive.

I would remind you for many people gender identity is not a "relatively minor" part of their identity or lives.

 

[cadaveca]

Honestly, I have been in that culture myself and while it has its faults, I see wayway more discrimination here in the attitudes presented than I ever wanted to see. It's outright painful to me to see.

There used to be a time when your sexuality was private, and nobody else's concern. Now it's out in the public, and a big issue. Go figure. Maybe it was private for a reason? Because none of these people that feel discriminated against are feeling anything that generations before didn't feel... they are just more "vocal" about it, and given the prevelence of cell phones aand internet access, where people think they have privacy, this is of no surprise.

I'm pretty normal, but my skin is not white, so I have experienced racism and discrimination in ways that most of these people never will, even from my own "family". You don't hear me complaining about being marginalized, but I have been, not because of what's under my clothes, but what isn't covered. I don't have any sympathy for those complaining about gender, myself. I have my own problems to deal with.

With that said, I feel ya on that last comment, and so... I really feel this is a subject that doesn't belong here. Clearly the community here isn't capable of discussing this, and the topic is causing people to take sides, rather than bringing them together. I had always hoped TPU was a place that anyone could come to discuss their PC tech, and nothing else mattered, yet I see that is not happning.

 

[Vayra86]

Which is what I said. If you look at their chromosomes, they'll still have XX or XY. But if they can't reproduce, that's a disorder of some sort. Which is exactly what I mentioned.

If one has all the physical parts but they feel like the opposite gender (or no gender or whatever), that's a mental disorder. And even trans people who aren't overly sensitive snowflakes agree on that. That doesn't make them bad people, it's just that they have this condition.

Things are only 'a condition' because we label it as such. But this is a matter of identity. Not a matter of illness at its core. These people are healthy but lack a trait others do have. News flash: there are hundreds of traits both physical and mental that people eother have or lack. Are those all 'defects' and 'disorders'??

Consider 'I have a short attention span' for example: it used to be just that; now we say its ADHD and a 'disorder'. Why? Because it is an inconvenient trait in our society.

Food for thought...

I used to teach kids in school. Seen it firsthand how labels can cripple people and send them further into exclusion rather than it helping them get the right kind of attention.

 

[hat]

With that said, I feel ya on that last comment, and so... I really feel this is a subject that doesn't belong here. Clearly the community here isn't capable of discussing this, and the topic is causing people to take sides, rather than bringing them together. I had always hoped TPU was a place that anyone could come to discuss their PC tech, and nothing else mattered, yet I see that is not happning.

There's only one problem with that. TPU is made up of... people, and sometimes people suck.

I don't pretend to understand everybody's problems, their differences, or why things are the way they are in the world. It's a big pile of hot garbage. But, at the same time, I don't look to take anything away from anybody, either. None of these people seem to be out to harm me in any way, so I'm certainly not out to harm anybody else. Not sure why these things seem to bother some of us.

 

[StrayKAT]

I'm so tired of the PC brown shirts that I'm willing to retort with violence of the Medieval type ...

I'd say relax. They're already miserable as it is. Take comfort in that.