And while it may be a Manji, the spiral is just an ancient symbol used in many civilizations across the world, including Japan and ancient Germania... but that still an insensitive thing to put in a game.
>>2958116 >PC is a flawed concept and this thread is garbage. I never saw anything wrong with the photo in OP's post. Whatever... maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong but let's just make this politics neutral, okay?
>>2958381 i think I actually follow triggergrumps, its hilarious. for every episode they make a list of all offensive things said and when they say it, so people can skip it. i dont understand why they still wanna watch the show if half the things the hosts say are so offensive that they cant even stand hearing it?
>>2958096 Perhaps if we had a Swastika Education Day where everyone has to draw the clockwise and counter-clockwise swirling ones 50 times each they'd learn and understand the difference.
Also The Ninja Warriors seems to belong here since all the stupid mook enemies are black while all the enemies with skills or rank are white or asian or even robots. Even the palette swaps for the mooks still have black skin. I could imagine certain people seeing this and at least raising an eyebrow. https://youtu.be/KdH06T9qnQ0?t=57
>>2958381 Is that even a penis, or is a wine-bottle she's hiding to avoid having to be intimate with Larry?
>>2959271 But then they'd lose their super pals Arin and Jan and all their internet friends by proxy, and have to dwell on the fact nobody can stand them in reality long enough to establish a meaningful relationship.
>>2959357 Just like Hitler didn't invent the toothbrush mustache, the Roman salute or killing jews, he just made it so nobody could use it again.
The spiral is just a common symbol in many European, Asian, Amerindian and African, etc. societies. You can even see the manju many times with the "swastika" orientation. If Hitler would've put a circle on the German flag, would all circles be considered offensive?
The spiral is just a visually pleasing symbol that isn't inherently Nazi at all. WW2 ended over 70 years ago... can we start getting over it already?
I don't think OP was even alive in the '80s and '90s. Conservative groups were always the ones railing against things like the portrayal of women in video games, violence in the media, homosexuality and other "ungodly" lifestyles. How soon we forget about Jack Thompson.
Social justice isn't anything new for that matter, but it hasn't been a majority viewpoint since the '60s when everybody was doped up and spent all their time banging on drums while preaching about free love. Which didn't work out so well since everybody quickly realized that an active workforce was necessary to keep the nation running after all.
We've always had Marxist fringe groups and the like that parade around college campuses, but they're a very small percentage of the population, and usually grow out of their mindset shortly before (or after) finishing college. To say they're a threat to freedom of expression is absurd. You need to be more concerned about the conservative groups who still outnumber college kiddies 100 to 1, are centrally organized and have real legislative power in the U.S.
To put it another way: If I turn on my TV, the only opinions I'm likely to see broadcast are "The 700 Club" or some conservative talk show that's obsessed with the liberal / gay / feminist / immigration boogeyman, as opposed to some 300-lb. transracial womyn with green hair complaining about how she was "raped" on the subway when a man gave her an unsolicited stare. Despite what 4chan would have you believe, "tumblrinas" are largely just exaggerated boogeymen and cherry-picked caricatures.
>>2960265 >but they're a very small percentage of the population, and usually grow out of their mindset shortly before (or after) finishing college. That's kind of the thing though, with online social networks these people are staying in their safe bubbles and aren't growing out of the mindset.
I'd also like to say that I've never come across the stereotypical "tumblrina" or whatever in real life, but I've come across what feels like 100 people who complain about them.
The "boogeyman" comparison is apt, because that's what it feels like. All of these people complaining about something that I've never come across. Even if there are few of these type of people on the internet, in real life they would be so disbursed that it would be irrelevant, so who fucking cares?
Jack Thompson was a bigger deal back in the day because he was far more influential and his cries to ban violent video games actually did convince a lot of people. But according to 4chan we have to beware "libcucks XD"
I don't think your argument is entirely fair here. You're saying that these left wing censors don't exist just because the stereotypical tumblerina is so rare and ultimately irrelevant to mainstream thought. But that doesn't mean that there aren't more 'moderate' left wing censors out there.There are plenty of them, they're just not these overblown caricatures you mentioned. They're normal people who happen to be drinking the PC kool aid. They might not be transethnic otherkins with obnoxiously died hair, but they still hold onto the basic mindset that if something is deemed 'offensive' it must be removed immediately, even at the cost of free speech. Now, I don't know, maybe the conservatives are still more of a threat to that freedom, more likely to censor. Maybe it just depends on where you live. Take a look at the UK, where someone was arrested for making a racist remark on twitter a little while ago, and that's just one example. Take a look at places like Germany and like Sweden. They're all too happy to censor and opress in the name of left wing 'political correctness'.
And don't get me wrong. I hate both sides. I hate the idea of censorship and surpression of speech no matter where it's coming from, but you, you're getting dangerously close to being apologetic of these people. Trying to pretend they're just harmless eccentrics instead of seeing the situation as it actually is: an ever growing ideology that seeks to supress any and all ideas that oppose it, while at the same time, pretending they're not censoring anything at all. I don't think ignoring them or pretending that they don't exist is going to help this situation. Especially when, as you said, the right wing are still so active in censorship themselves. Now we're living in a world where people on both sides want 'offensive' things banned.
>>2960265 >To put it another way: If I turn on my TV, the only opinions I'm likely to see broadcast are "The 700 Club" or some conservative talk show that's obsessed with the liberal / gay / feminist / immigration boogeyman, as opposed to some 300-lb. transracial womyn with green hair complaining about how she was "raped" on the subway when a man gave her an unsolicited stare. Despite what 4chan would have you believe, "tumblrinas" are largely just exaggerated boogeymen and cherry-picked caricatures.
That seems to be the case, I also didnt met people like that yet, nor one of those new-wave feminists. Maybe 2 tamer versions(interested in social and women rights) in college, but not like those lunatics on the internet.
On the other hand, why does this feminist movement has such an impact on popculture, that things in game are being changed to be less sexist. People have become very aware about not being transphobic and minorities stuff too. why would that NASA guy had to apoligize if this hardcore feminist movement on the internet is something, next to no people really care about and everybody just thinks they are retarded, let them be.
I didnt mind a female and a black guy being the lead roles in Star Wars, but I mind that it felt forced like "yeah, finally! lets even things out, so progressive. We should have more latinos next."
>>2960446 >On the other hand, why does this feminist movement has such an impact on popculture, that things in game are being changed to be less sexist. People have become very aware about not being transphobic and minorities stuff too.
Mainly because companies worry more about things on the internet than they used to. They pay too much attention to social media, and not reality.
>You're saying that these left wing censors don't exist just because the stereotypical tumblerina is so rare
You're taking these groups in a much broader context than you should. We're talking about college kids who are getting involved with fringe groups because they're just now leaving their parents' nest and finding a sense of themselves and their place in this world. Kids go through phases like this, especially if they grew up in restrictive households where their parents might have pushed a specific set of beliefs.
It's funny, because you're starting to sound like one of those moral guardians who go on TV and seem distressed that their goth child may be sacrificing animals and worshiping Satan. Kids are kids. They rebel and "express" themselves in stupid, childish and often self-caricaturizing ways. tumblrinas are no more alarming than emos.
As for any "censors" you may be referring to, these are elective changes made by specific media groups and video game developers who take feedback from their audiences. Their audience largely consists of teenagers and college kids. Do you see where I'm going with this? It's just a marketing strategy. To believe that a video game electively toning down cleavage is somehow a slippery-slope to the abolition of free speech is utterly absurd. These developers would push all sorts of bizarre or ideologically charged content if their PR staff believed that's what their audience wanted to see. I mean, do you actually base your beliefs about the political atmosphere of this society on what you've read about video game "culture"?
So, what's the solution to this problem? Stop playing AAA titles. Be a responsible consumer and don't give your money to developers whose practices you disagree with. Not every developer or is big budget. Some companies don't sell themselves out to the court of public opinion, even if maintaining their artistic integrity comes at the cost of never topping the sales charts.
>>2960537 I guess not, but take it more as an invitation to consider the far-reaching effects of these people eventually occupying key public positions, nepotistically ensconcing themselves deeper and deeper. Creating an echo chamber for themselves so they can dream up schemes to, I dunno, enforce a curfew on all males over 16, free money for blacks, etc.
It's already happening to some degree, when the time comes for the increasingly inadequate, neurotic snowflakes colleges seem to be churning out to take the reigns, then it probably doesn't bear thinking about.
>>2958130 >because they were afraid it sounded too similar to Muslim chanting. That's literally what it was. Even if you can't understand the rest of what's being said the "allahu akbar" is as clear as day.
>>2960436 why are bigoted opinions so important to you
i mean i think the threat of force is a pretty dumb way to try to change people's minds but still. free speech is moreso about saying what you want about the government than the freedom to spout hate speech
You basically just took one look at my post, boiled it down to this one point and then ignored everything else I said. You keep asserting that it's just college kids, but by doing that you're making a caricature of your own in order to try and downplay the influence that they can have and make it seem like they're essentially harmless. We both know well it's not just college kids. It's people of varying ages and backgrounds. There are the educated feminist professors and the feminist organisations that get involved in this stuff alongside the college kids and the bottom of the barrel tumblr morons.
>As for any "censors" you may be referring to, these are elective changes made by specific media groups and video game developers who take feedback from their audiences
And there it is. There you are, trying to hide the fact that they are censors. Here's the thing, when a company is making a game or a comic book or whatever, and a bunch of people start losing their shit over some design choice that annoys them because it goes against their stronly held political beliefs, and then the company changes it, that is still censorship. It is an attempt at soft censorship by the angry mob which results in the company self cesoring their product. Seriously, all this takes is to look at the wikipedia article for censorship to understand that there are many kinds of it and it doesn't have to be some large government entity shutting them down with the threat of legal punishment.
>To believe that a video game electively toning down cleavage is somehow a slippery-slope to the abolition of free speech is utterly absurd.
And this one is just a straight up strawman. You obviously ran out of steam by this point in your post and just lost any pretense of trying to be reasonable.
Also I found it funny that you would compare me to a moral guardian given how anti-censorship I obviously am, and how apologetic you're being towards leftist censors.
Worrying about these people in video games is narrow minded.
They're having much much worse affects in areas that matter. While you're right in how a business would work, to say these people aren't having significant impact on the world in many ways is to be blind of what's been going on in the world.
>kids are kids
While many of the problems are coming from college kids who are wrecking what a uni is meant to be, these are people who can be well into their 40s or 50s. "kids being kids" has nothing to do with it.
Acting like nobody listens to these people or that they're "boogeymen" is ignorant. They really are not very rare. I'm not trying to be insulting but to claim these things is really to be out of the world news.
>>2960513 If a conservative group shouted >NO GAYS IN VIDEO GAMES, THAT'S UNCHRISTIAN You'd call them a group of self righteous pricks. You have the right to be a prick, but that doesn't mean it's okay
>>2960265 >Conservative groups were always the ones railing against things like the portrayal of women in video games, violence in the media
Wrong. Politicians like Tipper Gore, Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, and Herb Kohl and were all democrats and campaigned against videogames. It has always been a bipartisan issue.
Even as early as 1982, left-wing groups got games like Custer's Revenge outlawed from Oklahoma, and Capcom to censor Final Fight (OP is another example of this, see: >>2960352). It just wasn't as prevalent as it is now. Of course the right-wing did it a lot then, but it was never exclusive to them.
>Social justice isn't anything new for that matter It has been a growing thing though, and the main new factor that changes the game is social media.
>To say they're a threat to freedom of expression is absurd. They absolutely are. Not only do they fired and censored on a regular basis, a lot of them also want to repeal the first amendment.
>To put it another way: If I turn on my TV, the only opinions I'm likely to see broadcast are "The 700 Club" Then you're not looking hard enough. Most media outlets don't lean that way at all, and most of the internet which is where the flow of information and a lot of activism take place nowadays is very left-wing.
>"tumblrinas" are largely just exaggerated boogeymen and cherry-picked caricatures. You sound really unbiased.
I thought OP said "no SJWs". Fuck off back to Rebbit.
>>2961062 Totally doesn't sound like that, and most definitely isn't 'clear as day'. Nintendo was playing to a vocal minority, much like most of the world with Islam right now. It's easier to pander and appease than die.
Asshole offensive people call so much stuff "politically correct" now that the word has lost all meaning. Apparently now if you just disagree with something someone said, you want them to be "politically correct". No I want you to not be a fucking retard actually.
You can't just label anytime anyone calls you out on some bullshit you just did/said as them wanting things to be politically correct.
>>2967501 Thing though, it might just be your morality is different from someone else's. Like when Muslims call for political correctness for islamophobia when they themselves are the most bigoted people on earth who refuse to even shake hands with a woman or faggot.
>>2960265 It's funny, I usually see the older crowd watching shit like The View which is just full of conservative bashing. It swings both ways.
Conservative elements have been losing a lot of power with media, so things like Jack Thompson aren't really a threat anymore. Having your college professor doc points on a term paper because you said "firemen" instead of "firepeople" is something that's occuring more and more now though, and this begins to spread to places like movies, TV, and eventually to video games, a thing that many people on this board care deeply about. It makes sense that people would get angry on these agents of change.
>>2968692 Because it's not demeaning at all. It is simply a pattern of speech still used by a vast portion of the population without any negative connotation.
For instance, if I say Mankind, most people will infer that I am talking about all humans in general, as the prefix "man" denotes humans in general. "Man" can also mean the male sex as well, and it is up to context to determine what "man" is referring to. No one uses or really has used the word "mankind" to be dismissive of the female sex, and thus changing it because someone has decided to take offense at it because it's some form of "micro aggression" is completely baseless.
Once upon a time, I would've been much more receptive to change for the upliftment of marginalized peoples, but after seeing these people wage wars over the most minor and insignificant of details instead of moving for change that truly benefits them, I've lost a lot of my sympathy. I can't imagine continuing this tactic will gain much traction in the coming years when even the most staunch ally will find themselves on the wrong side of their crusade one day.
>>2968692 Don't pose a question in such a dishonest and disingenuous way, where you know that the target would not agree with the premise of the question. If you have to resort to tactics like that then you're not much of a thinker or of a debater.
>>2968810 i'm saying that the first amendment in general was built upon being able to say what you want about the government, it wasn't necessarily to protect your oh-so-important /pol/ shitposting. bigots using it is a contrived appeal to authority
>>2969718 >it wasn't necessarily to protect your oh-so-important /pol/ shitposting. This is just revisionist thinking. You really think the founding fathers didn't think free-expression was important when they also decided to make freedom of religious expression a thing? One man's values are another man's bigotry. Your viewpoint is not the only one, that's very self centered.
>>2967501 >Apparently now if you just disagree with something someone said, you want them to be "politically correct" No one cares if you just voice your disagreement with them. Trying to force people to behave a certain way with consequences is the problem.
Actually, religious freedom is directly tied into the government as well. I'm surprised you know so little of your own country. Many of your states were formed by people whose religion was disallowed in England.
>>2969735 can you stop acting like fascist opinion isn't objectively harmful and antiquated? >>2969741 awuwuwu the government won't condone your bigotry.
like i said, i don't think that the governmental threat of force is the right way to change the minds of fascists but it's not like theyre valid opinions that are on equal grounds with actually progressive ideals. maybe you should learn not to hurt people based on their identity so your government doesn't feel it has to make you >>2969841 i think he's saying you're acting like the constitution has any inherent ethical value outside of its authoritative status. citing it doesn't make your opinion any more valid
>>2959340 >Barret (or Bullet, if you want) This caught my interest, so I had to google a bit.
>開発中の名前はブロウだったが、アメリカの市場で問題がある名前だったため弾丸 (bullet) からとった「バレット」に落ち着いたというエピソードが本作攻略本「解体新書」で語られている Apparently Barret was originally supposed to be called "Blow", but since they thought it would cause problems in America they changed his name to the current one, which comes from "bullet".
From Wikipedia, which says it was mentioned in the guidebook.
>>2969863 Our freedom isn't derived from the constitution or government, but the concept of natural rights. The constitution guarantees it and forces the government to respect it by law and enforce it. I think you're misinterpreting what I'm trying to say here. The fact that the founding fathers decided that freedom of religion should be a thing for all religions (which was a direct response to the conditions of the old world like you mentioned) is consistent with the idea that all expressions of speech must also be free. It is not just limited to the fact that the government can't censor us or any criticism of the government, but expands to any speech that is not "fighting words", incitement to violence which is also not hate speech (which according to the SCOTUS is protected free speech) . No person can rob any other person of these rights. There is no distinction between government censorship or censorship imposed by anybody else. You can choose not to listen or not aide their speech, but you cannot stop their right to speech. It's the same thing with religion. You don't have to support a church or whatever or even listen to or support their rhetoric. But they can say and operate however they want as long as they are not breaking other laws. Just like freedom of speech. They are consistent with each other like I had said. The idea that the founding fathers would draft up natural rights that can not be taken by government, but instead can be taken by other people is absolute nonsense in a democratic republic. John Adams used the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the past for good reason.
The endgame of political correctness is censorship by social pressures. It is literally tyranny of the majority, or should I say tyranny of the vocal minority, mob rule.
Nintendo used some ambient soundtrack from one of those compilations and when later after the first bunch of carts was already in production they looked closer at what they are chanting found it inappropriate to their "no religious references" (ANY religious references!) policy and changed it for v1.1 .
>>2969718 The First Amendment protects government from infringing upon a human right that everyone possesses. However, because freedom of expression is a human right, all other people have a duty to respect that right regardless of whether they're acting on behalf of government or not. This idea that freedom of expression only applies to anti-government speech is a bit of mental gymnastics that allows people (most often progressives) to find a convenient excuse for depriving those who disagree with them of their right to free expression by means of silencing tactics and censorship. It displays a lack of commitment to the principles of human rights and free speech, and is both illiberal and authoritarian by nature.
>>2975078 >quit trying to make bigotry into some apolitical "natural law".
Nobody is doing that, they're telling you to fuck off because nobody wants to hear your whiny tumblr bullshit here. It's in the OP:
Everything else you're spouting is just projection and strawmen, like anyone who cares about free speech just wants to be able to shout "NIGGER" all day and is trying to "impose bigotry as sacred natural law". That's all in your head.
Here let me help you: >>>/twitter/ >>>/facebook/ >>>/tumblr/ >>>/leddit/ >>>/neogaf/
All sites where you'll be more than welcome to cry about le mean RAYCISS for the thousandth time, and maybe someone will actually care.
>>2975078 Actually, the right to yell at "nigger" at black people is important, and the fact that the right to free expression has such broad bounds is the reason you can yell "bigot" and "racist" at people who disagree with you. I'm proud to live in a society that tolerates expression of all views, no matter how "degenerative and unimportant." I'm glad that the Westboro Baptist Church can express its views just as openly as other radicals like Bill Ayers or Michael Moore or Ann Coulter. I may not like what any of those people say, but it's important that they be able to say what's on their minds, and they absolutely have a natural and innate right to express themselves. You should be glad too, because your views are also radical and would be subject to censorship in a less free society.
The fact that you're rejecting the idea of natural rights frankly validates my previous point: you have no commitment to free speech (or any other human right) as a principle and defend it only when it's used in your favor, and use that as justification for censorship. That sort of "flexibility" is what put people under the thumbs of secret police and into concentration camps for political crimes under the far-left governments in the 20th Century. Your brand of activism is falling out of vogue, by the way. You should be grateful that others don't share your views on human rights, because you would be rightfully distraught if you were subject to your own views on the validity of dissenting speech.
By the way, 4chan is a website that both embraces and revels in the asinine and inane speech that comes from absolute free expression. That's why we have places like /b/ and /pol/. If you want to complain about that sort of thing, 4chan isn't place to you. I say this completely seriously: Go to Reddit. You'll fit in better.
>>2975445 Nah man, 4chan is the place for all us shits. He can dislike intolerant speech, you can wax on about natural rights, and I can jack off to whatever I want. We all fit in here, cause this place is a sewer where everyone shits.
>>2975626 What I should have said is that there's no fitting in here. Just shits and more shits. We're like the writing in a toilet stall. People can call you out for the shit you say, and you can call them out for that. But we're all still shits.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.