What's new

In today's news...


OAMP

Turtle Poker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,793
Reputation score
154
Re: In today's news...

France has the biggest gulf between what they say and what they do of any country I've ever seen, and I still haven't settled on a good explanation yet, heh. (Other than that they're the flipping French, which seems to work).
 

Smokefish

Needs to go commit sudoku
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
1,107
Reputation score
115
Re: In today's news...

This thread is HON HON HON BAGUÉTTÉ LE CRÉMÈ SACRÉ BLÉU DU FROMAGÉ.

In other news that doesn't really matter to anyone outside of neckbeard basement dwellers the guy that was working on Chapter Master, a fan-made game centered around taking on the mantle of the head honcho of a Space Marine Chapter from Warhammer 40.000, is dropping it and opensourcing the code. In favor of possibly making a game about rescuing waifus from a tower of some non-descript nature.

;_;7
 

Cappy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,625
Reputation score
429
Re: In today's news...

Yeah, because women dominate politics in so many countries. Oh wait, no they don't. There's only two countries in the world with over 50% female legislators and only three countries with over 45%. Interestingly, Rwanda has the highest percent. I don't know much about Rwanda lately, but they seem to be doing a lot better than they were 25 years ago at least.
Simply because the majority of politicians happen to be men, doesn't mean that they can't be majorly influenced by radical groups. Gender studies(It should be noted that up until recently these were referred to as "Women's Studies") classes in Murika basically hammer double-standards into the students until they either accept it or act out and get into trouble. rather than a constructive way for the teachers to bring the opposing view to light and explain their position in an enlightening and educational way to somebody who clearly disagrees. The moment you can't accept or disprove an opposing viewpoint constructively or cite your own information in a rational way in response to being challenged you are a failure as an educator, and this attitude has been going on for well over a decade.

The result has been as such: Even though we are at the most progressive point in society we have ever reached, EVER! Feminism has not slowed down at all in response to the coming social changes and has in fact become more prevalent and rabid than ever before (presumably because of how easy it is to be a feminist these days), there's no accommodation being made to society to stabilize the coming changes in the new social construct, and discussion about such things rapidly gets demonized as misogyny or a patriarchal attack the moment it comes from a male point of view or challenges any changes being made in the name of feminism (The 40% shareholder ruling being a good example, considering that studies show females generally prefer degrees that don't accommodate that kind of position where as men generally do, making this ruling actually kind of destructive in the sense that merit doesn't always take precedent)

And if radical feminists don't influence politics at all, please tell me how Zoey Quinn (And less importantly Anita Sarkeesian, noted kickstarter liar/fraud) is speaking on behalf of the UN on the issues of cyberviolence and harassment when Zoey Quinn is blatantly guilty of harassing people online and sicking her groupies directly on other groups. Whether feminist or anti-feminist as long as it suits her she's happy to engage in massive double standards and commit to completely illogical emotional arguments without a lick of reasoning, and the UN is happily giving them pedestals to speak just to keep certain groups happy. Politics can be influenced by a large amount of many different things, noted political figures are ultimately only one of those many things.
 

OAMP

Turtle Poker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,793
Reputation score
154
Re: In today's news...

Cappy, as someone who's first hand been to a lot of colleges, I'm still waiting for the day I see these so called feminist influences. Maybe it's a case of the Mandela Effect (see here ), but sometimes I wonder if we live in the same universe.
 

Obsidious

Evard's Tentacles of Forced Intrusion
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
631
Reputation score
78
Re: In today's news...

The term Gender Studies is probably way too generalized. It's like "Particle Studies" or something, where you take way too many different concepts, models and interactions into account without giving people at least a hint on where the results of these studies could be expected to be applied.

And really, I can only assume that G.S. have come a long way since they were established. And there have to be a lot of "serious" scientists in that field doing "serious" research - really, I do think that there's a science behind it. The task of trying to find patterns in complex dynamics in order to understand and even make predictions, it never stops and it is worthwhile.

However it's boring. More attention is gained by screaming monkeys that want to participate just because of the convenience of being right by definition (from their perspective). This doesn't really apply to this topic only. Really, in a lot of fields you see the tendency that people have recognized that they are perceived to have moral high ground just because they act offended. This leads them to artificially emotionalize and dumb down every (would be) discussion they take part in.

In the long run, this will only damage reputation and recognition that others have worked long and hard for.
 

Cappy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,625
Reputation score
429
Re: In today's news...

The Mandela Effect certainly seems like an interesting concept, and popular theories in physics certainly have supported some of the major ideas behind it. A large amount of my accounts are based on the extreme and loud personalities that often end up talking at mics or on pedestals, people who have far more influence than should ever be warranted (Fox News comes to mind). Honestly speaking, I'm sure there a bunch of perfectly reasonable feminists who go by completely ignored just as Obsidious asserts, which is highly problematic because they should be the ones at the front doing the speaking, having the influence, etc...

But in my experiences that simply hasn't been the case, emotional arguments seem to be the winning influence for a large amount of people, which is the only way I could possibly rationally believe that figures like Zoey Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian make their claims to fame in spite of the evidence of their fraudulent behaviour and misgivings. This is of course, being the case on both sides, a lot of the time the people who are standing up and talking out against these terribly damaging figures are equally extreme and illogical, though not always. Although I've got to say, at least in the case of the latter, they do try to present unbiased evidence to support their obviously extreme claims, and yet unlike the former never appear to get any kind of publicly endorsed talking positions or pedestals from which to speak. I guess I should also point out that my main qualms aren't just with extremist feminists but rather more specifically extremist progressivists, whose grouping and ideals seem to overlap quite heavily.

It's possible that I may over-interperet the severity of things because of combination of hugboxing and the only other real influences coming from the other side being blatantly terrible shit I hear about that could potentially affect my everyday life upon coming to England. I can't really think of a thing feminism has done in the last five years that has been remotely positive, but it might help to hear about it if anybody cares to share such information.
 

Crawdaddy

Tentacle God
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
1,355
Reputation score
749
Re: In today's news...

I can't really think of a thing feminism has done in the last five years that has been remotely positive, but it might help to hear about it if anybody cares to share such information.
Well, I think part of that is because a number of feminist ideas have become incorporated into mainstream thought by now.

Let's take the Nobel Prize winner, Malala, who got shot in the head by the Taliban for wanting education as a girl. In a number of places in the world, girls are not legally guaranteed even a basic education - the continued work for school coverage and access is fundamentally feminist, although I suspect many of us just think of it as "common sense" or "fairness" by now.

Then there's healthcare access. That whole Planned Parenthood debacle in the US is a step in a longer conflict between opposing sides, where self-declared feminists generally side with the pro-choice arguments. But we an take it further - for example, in India, I believe, there was a case some years ago about how in major cities, there were public restrooms only for men (urinals, mostly, I believe), because they were just cheaper and easier to set up. There was political battle to get more female-friendly restrooms available.

Speaking of India, you might have heard of the recent rapes of low-caste women. This is a case of intersectionality, where different social categories cross in order to make a particularly vulnerable group. In extreme cases, women have actually been subjected to gang rape as a form of punishment. This has riled up a lot of Indian women, acting as groups, but also a lot of Indian men, and also various religious groups that find the practice inexcusable. While the notion of not allowing women to be punished with gang rape might seem like obvious judicial fairness and a human rights issue to us, the idea of bodily autonomy of women is a very feminist one.

Other issues I can think of is stuff like worker's rights in south-east asia, as a lot of the light industry (textile, electronics) there rely on cheap and easily replaceable female labour. Young women move to cities for a couple of years, work in the factories under grueling conditions, and then either return to their home regions (often rural areas). Unfortunately, a lot of these women are economically exploited because many countries create specific zones where labour laws are more lax so as to appease international corporations. There is no health coverage, pensions, or indeed the right to organize. This is another case of how class concerns intersect with gender concerns, and so it might not seem obvious that labor rights are also feminist in these cases. I could've mentioned a similar case in Mexico, where for example factory administrators brush away huge numbers of rapes in their vicinity on the fact that the largely single, young females they employ are promiscuous, while neglecting the fact that they often force women to work very late shifts, with no organized transport off the industrial district, forcing women to walk through dangerous urban areas.

I could probably mention more, but if one stops focusing on the most ridiculous or culturally-radical avant-garde notions within the feminist spectrum, I'd argue that there is a lot of very important issues where feminism can be a powerful tool towards equality and an imporoved quality of life for many, many people.
 

Cappy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,625
Reputation score
429
Re: In today's news...

Well that's all fantastic, I love that those things have all been worked towards being accomplished and are actively being fought for. But there's a common theme, all of those are internationally based and not western(One exception* withstanding). Feminist Progressivists base their efforts in the UK and America, what good have they done that actually affects us is my question, because otherwise they should be basing their efforts overseas or in foreign areas, which isn't exactly easy to do. Especially with the progressivist attitude of screaming "Islamophobia!" or (x) in response to these allegations being made by anyone who happens to be white. I get the notion very often that the popular attitude with certain groups is, "Culture trumps human rights, as long as you aren't white or Japanese" , or "My feelings trump freedom of speech, stop triggering me with your opposing opinions" There's a definite trend in some colleges of people being censored because their opinions are found offensive. Whenever this happens it appears to be the effect of Liberalist progressivism having gone so far that it's looped back round to conservatism... Somehow?!

Exception* being the whole pro-choice thing, which to be honest I'm not too sure about. I agree abortion should be available up to a certain period of time (It should become obvious that you're pregnant well within that time with plenty of time to think), but once the fetus starts reaching certain stages of development I believe it's ethically questionable. A lot of modern western feminists would say that I don't have a right to espouse that opinion because I'm a man, and I believe that kind of thinking is problematic.
 
Last edited:

OAMP

Turtle Poker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,793
Reputation score
154
Re: In today's news...

It doesn't really happen that much, and anyone who's on the receiving end of a college's idiocy typically wins in court. A fair and even balance is being maintained. Don't fall for the click baity media that just want your ad view revenue.
 

Cappy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,625
Reputation score
429
Re: In today's news...

Well, that's what archiving+adblock is for. Besides, that doesn't explain mainstream media like television and actual newspapers all shilling this kind of stuff. And I don't think I should have to point out the problem with this kind of thing running amok in actual colleges.

And I dunno how it is there, but over here getting the money to pay for a lawyer in a court battle isn't generally viable for the typical person, let alone a college student who's probably in debt.
 

OAMP

Turtle Poker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,793
Reputation score
154
Re: In today's news...

Page views still drive the rate websites get for ads. Just because you don't see the ads doesn't mean you're removed from the equation, actually. Your statement about how ads doesn't explain television, though, is the best joke I've heard today. Granted, I haven't heard too many fresh jokes, but still... It's all owned by groups who are vying for market share, to drive ad revenue. Newspapers it's even more obvious. Their subscription model is kaput. Record numbers are closing because we have the freaking internet now. Why would someone buy a newspaper unless they have outrageous claims? Believe me, my family used to be heavily involved in the newspaper business until it started going to hell in the mid 00s, which was high time to jump ship. The trend is so palatable it's like being smacked in the face by a 2x4. Not that trotting out my own credentials is always the best course of action either, but in my academic field I can't read two freaking journal articles without being interrupted with the need to dive into media studies. Believe me, the number of media sources you should trust in this day in age is 0. Zip. Nada. Unless you individually research each individual incident, you simply are misinformed. I'm not knocking anyone for being misinformed. It's almost prohibitively expensive to be well informed now. It's just the way things are, though. Still, there's a basic choice, be a pawn or don't be a pawn. Always conduct independent research.

For the second statement, for a second we'll assume that such notions are "running amok" on college campuses, which I still contest. The few cases that do happen are generally taken pro-bono, because every lawyer knows damn well these kids are gonna get a shit-ton of money from the college. I predict the next major change in the general state of affairs isn't prompted by any social movement, but because too many colleges have had the pants sued off them and are losing millions of dollars. It's already happening. Believe me, the colleges don't want to be in the situation they're in, but it's the result of side effects from laws that people didn't envision at the time. It's not malice, it's just incompetence. In damn nearly every instance, incompetence is the easier answer, but in these cases we actually have a paper trail most of the time. For the time being, the average college student who got caught up in such a case might be in for some hard times, but give it a year or two and they're gonna be stinking rich.
 

Hentaispider

Lord of the Tap Dance \oO.Oo/ (And Reputation Mana
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
11,998
Reputation score
430
Re: In today's news...

Page views still drive the rate websites get for ads. Just because you don't see the ads doesn't mean you're removed from the equation, actually. Your statement about how ads doesn't explain television, though, is the best joke I've heard today. Granted, I haven't heard too many fresh jokes, but still... It's all owned by groups who are vying for market share, to drive ad revenue. Newspapers it's even more obvious. Their subscription model is kaput. Record numbers are closing because we have the freaking internet now. Why would someone buy a newspaper unless they have outrageous claims? Believe me, my family used to be heavily involved in the newspaper business until it started going to hell in the mid 00s, which was high time to jump ship. The trend is so palatable it's like being smacked in the face by a 2x4. Not that trotting out my own credentials is always the best course of action either, but in my academic field I can't read two freaking journal articles without being interrupted with the need to dive into media studies. Believe me, the number of media sources you should trust in this day in age is 0. Zip. Nada. Unless you individually research each individual incident, you simply are misinformed. I'm not knocking anyone for being misinformed. It's almost prohibitively expensive to be well informed now. It's just the way things are, though. Still, there's a basic choice, be a pawn or don't be a pawn. Always conduct independent research.

For the second statement, for a second we'll assume that such notions are "running amok" on college campuses, which I still contest. The few cases that do happen are generally taken pro-bono, because every lawyer knows damn well these kids are gonna get a shit-ton of money from the college. I predict the next major change in the general state of affairs isn't prompted by any social movement, but because too many colleges have had the pants sued off them and are losing millions of dollars. It's already happening. Believe me, the colleges don't want to be in the situation they're in, but it's the result of side effects from laws that people didn't envision at the time. It's not malice, it's just incompetence. In damn nearly every instance, incompetence is the easier answer, but in these cases we actually have a paper trail most of the time. For the time being, the average college student who got caught up in such a case might be in for some hard times, but give it a year or two and they're gonna be stinking rich.
Page views might have some influence, but last I checked internet ads are all either on pay per impression or pay per click basis. And just by using noscript to block google analytics, you remove yourself from page view side of the equation as well.
 

OAMP

Turtle Poker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,793
Reputation score
154
Re: In today's news...

Page views might have some influence, but last I checked internet ads are all either on pay per impression or pay per click basis. And just by using noscript to block google analytics, you remove yourself from page view side of the equation as well.
It doesn't really matter either way though. Who cares if YOU use ad block. They still need to draw people in as a whole, as many as possible. Some of those people won't be using ad block. In fact, as more and more people use ad block, they have to get more and more outrageous, to draw in more and more people.

Hell, I use ad block, but I'd be hypocritical if I didn't admit that it's part of the problem with news media. The equation doesn't mean shit when determining their behavior. "Oh, some people can't see the ads? Guess we just better roll over and die." -No one ever.
 

Hentaispider

Lord of the Tap Dance \oO.Oo/ (And Reputation Mana
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
11,998
Reputation score
430
Re: In today's news...

It doesn't really matter either way though. Who cares if YOU use ad block. They still need to draw people in as a whole, as many as possible. Some of those people won't be using ad block. In fact, as more and more people use ad block, they have to get more and more outrageous, to draw in more and more people.

Hell, I use ad block, but I'd be hypocritical if I didn't admit that it's part of the problem with news media. The equation doesn't mean shit when determining their behavior. "Oh, some people can't see the ads? Guess we just better roll over and die." -No one ever.
Some corporations are already paying AdBlock+ for acceptable ads to be added to their filter. If adblocking becomes widespread enough, it WILL change behaviour of the advertisers. One can hope that it's in the right direction, but I'm not really too optimistic about that unless there's some SERIOUS legislative changes to force content providers/advertising firms to shape up. Making them responsible for the damages caused by any malware their ads spread, for instance.
 

Obsidious

Evard's Tentacles of Forced Intrusion
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
631
Reputation score
78
Re: In today's news...

Hell, I use ad block, but I'd be hypocritical if I didn't admit that it's part of the problem with news media. The equation doesn't mean shit when determining their behavior. "Oh, some people can't see the ads? Guess we just better roll over and die." -No one ever.
Even within my limited financial means, I try to support certain organizations, among them news sites I am particularly fond of. And by god I am not a good samaritan, I think it's a necessity. I don't lecture people though. In fact I believe more people would actively support good journalism if they recognized it as such. Alas, for various reasons, among them the necessity to look for new models for creating revenue and more importantly the steady concentration of publishing houses, quality has been on the decline.

Some of these changes I believe to believe politically motivated, but not all of them. Still there are lots of independent news sites out there for example that try to do their own research, meticulously provide sources after assertions are made and thereby achieve things some people better-off claim not to be able to because of a lack of funding.

I might be expecting too much, but you can't possibly expect people to deliberately pay for products of journalists that regard themselves as teachers foremost, rather than mediators of information.

Also my personal opinion of ad-blockers is rather radical. It should be everybody's right to use them. Trying to ban them or restrict them is like forcing people to let in door-to-door salesmen, especially if you take into account linked ads actively executing code on your machine without your knowledge (javascript), or the websites themselves connecting you not only to necessary content delivery networks, but tracking sites etc.

Trying to be as strict as possible about what goes in and goes out is just common sense.
 

Crawdaddy

Tentacle God
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
1,355
Reputation score
749
Re: In today's news...

It's already happening.

The important thing to remember here is that when it comes to freely-accessible media, it's not really readers/viewers that are the true customers. Rather, it is the advertisers. Fiscally speaking, readers serve as a kind of metric that decides how much worth an ad is. It's the companies that pay for ads that keep the media fiscally stable.

Back in the old paper world it was different, of course, while there were ads there as well, there was also a lot of publications that got by mainly on subscriptions and store-sale, with the readers serving as the direct source of income.

When ad revenues become increasingly uncertain (due to several reason, partly adblocks, but also partly because fewer and fewer people actually click through ads) you gotta do other stuff.

Some try to return to a subscription-based revenue, limiting free readers to a couple of articles a day, or something like that, or have an integrated multimedia subscription that gives you apps for phones and tablets as well as the website and/or the entire online archive of the publication.

But then you have sort of the opposite direction - the erosion of the so-called "separation of between church and state". I'll let a funny guy talk about that:

.
 

XSI

Lurker
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
2,521
Reputation score
423
Re: In today's news...

That guy has some really shit tier jokes
Not funny at all and a shitty laugh track along with it
A few decent ones in there though

As for the topic, yeah. Advertising and news getting way too close.
You just plain can't trust news like that, but lets face it
Non-advertisement news such as government TV channels (Like BBC) can't be trusted either, because those are funded by politics, and will generally bring you the news that the establishment wants you to hear

Just like Russia Today tells you that Putin can't do bad and Russia is always good

I'd pay for good news, but I've not yet found anywhere that's actually good enough to pay for it
 

Crawdaddy

Tentacle God
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
1,355
Reputation score
749
Re: In today's news...

That guy has some really shit tier jokes
Not funny at all and a shitty laugh track along with it
A few decent ones in there though
I rather like John Oliver, but I'll admit not every one of his jokes are knee-slappers.

Non-advertisement news such as government TV channels (Like BBC) can't be trusted either, because those are funded by politics, and will generally bring you the news that the establishment wants you to hear.
Potentially, yes, and obviously critical thinking is required here as much as anywhere else, but to say that they're funded by politics might be a bit misleading, since BBC and similar networks are funded by a specific license fee that doesn't go through government budgets.
 

ToxicShock

(And Reputation Manager)
Staff member
Administrator
H-Section Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
11,239
Reputation score
1,016
Re: In today's news...

That's not a laugh track
 

Iggy

Tentacle God
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
2,208
Reputation score
306
Re: In today's news...

I love John Oliver's show.
 
Top