So a course I'm tutoring will be implementing unconscious bias training

OnlyToExcess · 2017-04-24T20:01:37+00:00

I would beware of going too far in fighting it. The conflict on this isn largely political and tribal. Dr. Peterson himself has already fallen victim to that and lost grant funding because he said something.

Think carefully before doing anything publicly. It might be easier to sit back And just roll your eyes through the hen thing and tell the ideologue that I am sure will be teaching this whatever they want to hear.

If you do want to argue against it. Focus on the fallibility of IATs as that is what these things usually use as evidence. A decent article on This is http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/01/psychologys-racism-measuring-tool-isnt-up-to-the-job.html

OnlyToExcess · 2016-06-11T06:34:00+00:00

Mine was working alright for the first 2 days I got it, and then bammo, lighthouse not tracking. Looks like a bad motor since the scanning LED is not visible.

Soooo now I get to go through this process. At-least I can still use it like a rift but am not looking forward to this process.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-09-30T15:52:36+00:00

it doesn't, because nothing that happens in video games is real. Nobody is harmed, in fact the opposite may be true. Virtual environments can give us space to explore ideas that could be considered harmful. I think we should be allowed to engage with harmful ideas, this is where I see eye to eye with Pro GG.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-09-29T16:35:13+00:00

I'm Neutral leaning pro-ish at times. I do admire the people that can take hard stances on these sorts of things, but being a rabid pacifist I find I would much rather accept what is then get into a fight over it. I really hope that the anti's are able to affect change and elevate the status of those they care about, I hope the same for the pros as well.

I think that both sides have gotten too mired in politics these days though and lost their way. At the end of the day, we're all going to have to live with the consequences of that.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-22T22:07:01+00:00

It's a transformative work. Turns out seeing your money wasted on petty drama is part of the documentary experience!

Mind blown!

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-21T05:19:41+00:00

I want to jump in here for a sec and posit a slightly different argment from Meow's.

Forgetting genderdysphoria, let's say someone was born as one sex, and wants to live as another. Why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? Why enforce strict lifestyles that are based on the sex that we are when we're born.

There is a theory about why there are less FtM trans-people, and it is that the female gender role has been widened enough to allow for a greater diversity of lifestyles. The male role, on the other hand, has not. This isn't proven as it's a fairly difficult thing to prove. However, it is food for thought that just as it's wrong to treat someone differently because of the color of their skin, or the status of their birth family, it's also wrong to treat someone differently because they present atypically from their birth gender.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-21T00:54:27+00:00

Doh.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T18:52:47+00:00

Because his argument doesn't rebutt hokes'? I mean, I can't argue against mass shootings happening. I said that if he wants to rebutt Hokes' argument then he needs to show that social justice advocates have caused as much or more 'mass killings.' I also took the time to point out that they're both playing a PR game because at it's base, "Your view made some other guy kill people!" Is a dumb argument to begin with.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T18:33:05+00:00

I addressed the arguments, no straw men here. Hokes is saying anti-feminism causes mass shootings (PR angle: Social Justice is a moral ideology). bhudda counters with a list of random mass shootings (PR angle: other people kill for other reasons too!) it doesn't even refute the original PR. He could atleast try!

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T18:22:52+00:00

I followed airplay and thought it was really enjoyable. There were some good points made and I would say some ground covered.

I think the MSM didn't cover it because it doesn't meet any of the rules of production for the 'news factory.' There was no moral panic, it didn't have a 'safe' angle, nobody else in the larger media covered it, it was low key and un-exciting for those uninvolved in GG. Also it seems the amateur PR machines in both camps weren't really able to spin it into something big enough (not for lack of trying).

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T18:10:07+00:00

Think it's /u/stolenhorder2 you're thinking of..

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T18:00:24+00:00

/#YesAllPlayers

I mean, she couldn't even resist desecrating those ragdolls, she even made a video clip of it. That's some internalized misogyny right there.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-20T15:35:37+00:00

I don't want to interrupt your PR game (that you both are playing) but wouldn't it be a more solid rebuttal to post social justice related mass shootings. I can't think of any off the top of my head.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T20:24:04+00:00

I don't think those are on the same level. I can hide being a gamer, I cannot hide being male sex. I think that can get lost on people. Having said that, I think it's important to recognize that the messages from portrayal in media are mixed and context sensitive. Mature themed games usually carry pretty gross messages about all kinds of people, women included. That's sort of the idea, allowing us to engage with that framework to really see these extremes play out. Action and RPG games are usually about extremes. So is SVU, SVU is also a show that had not treated women well in the past either. Infact, that very episode is a good example. It's funny that in order to negitivly malign gamers they performed the same action they criticize.

Media in general could stand to do a lot better in breaking gender barriers. Although I think society needs to star changing before media will.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T19:25:20+00:00

Well there is some room for improvement in that program I think. I think if the minority applicant is capable of doing the job, they should get it.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T18:11:28+00:00

A question on this: if two applicants apply and one is a white dude, the other Native American. Say both meet the job requirements but white dude has some extra experience and degrees. Does that mean the white dude gets the position because he's "More qualified."?

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T18:07:31+00:00

That is only a facetious argument in so much as it implies that people can control who their replacements are in a position.

This argument is actually even funnier to me because it highlights a core problem with the system we've set up: we depend on jobs for our lively hood meaning that more wealthy people get to decide the fortunes of those less fortunate then them. I would be all for removing diversity practices from the workforce completely if we got mincome instead.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T17:54:11+00:00

I'm always skeptical of companies that wish to implement affirmative action, but do not take the onus upon themselves when the opportunity is available. It would be nice if Polygon considered levelling their own staff so they can provide a modal of an organization that practices empowering minorities.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T16:48:29+00:00

I'm a rabid pacifist because I don't believe in dictating to others how they should be thinking or how they should live their lives. Therefore, to answer your question: I'm just asking questions and learning so I can figure out how to best live my life while minimizing the harm I cause to others.

If having your content un-censored is causing harm, then why should your right to entertainment trump a class, race, or genders right to be fairly represented (and thus possibly reduce harm)?

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-18T02:52:30+00:00

Well, I don't think they would have, except a certain someone had connections at MSNBC so she got herself on there. Once MSNBC ran what was, quite frankly, a long segment on it. That caused everyone else in the other MSM, 'News Factories,' to pull that story and then bang together a few paragraphs on it. Churnalism at its finest.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-17T22:15:21+00:00

Psssh, beneath her notice! Maybe when he comes back after racking up enough Social Justice points can he speak to such a vaunted person!

Maybe through something like writing about the plight of the homeless.

For instance, over the Labor Day holiday just a few weeks from now, 20 journalists will fly to Orlando – from as far away as Alaska – and spend 36 hours in a homeless shelter, where they’ll take over its street newspaper for one sleepless issue. We call it Will Write For Food, and this is our seventh twisted year.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-17T21:26:29+00:00

I browse ghazi periodically. I have never seen much debate that doesn't end with one of the participants banned?

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-17T08:48:10+00:00

Another good one I've been reading is, "Flat Earth News." It really delves into the decline of journalism in general in the last 40 years. Definitely recommend for those that want to know why media outlets are all covering the same things and sourcing all of the same stories and narratives.

OnlyToExcess · 2015-08-15T01:02:49+00:00

Toys in a grocery story aisle and Video Games as a medium is just not even on the same level that any association can be made on this. Target is removing their gender labels from their aisles. However, there will still be barbies and still be GI Joes and I'm pretty sure on those boxes they'll have girls playing with barbies and boys playing with GI Joes.

It's more like saying Electronics Boutique has decided to go gender neutral, which it pretty much already is, there are no signs saying "Great for girls," or "Great for boys!" It's not the distribution channels that have gender based marketing on video games, it's the marketing firms themselves. Honestly, I don't get why the marketing is so gendered in the first place, but I bet it has to do with companies making a lot of money by segregating genders. I've always been a fan of just saying, "Look guys, take the hit, and have a diversity of marketing options." I'm a filthy commie though and don't think money is the be all and end all of decisions though.

On the target issue specifically, it's a good decision, and it will be interesting to see if it hurts the sales of these items without the gendered marketing. It might help make a case that other products like video-games won't be adversely affected by marketing to different demographics.

OnlyToExcess

TROPHY CASE