SIONR: The Stupid Reaction to Black Cat in ‘Marvel’s Spider-Man’ DLC

Some of you may have noticed I don’t go after the SJW community all that much anymore.  There’s a reason for that.  For starters, I don’t have anything new to say.  It’s all kind of the same, at this point.  Doesn’t matter, anyway.  Nobody listens.  Anybody who disagrees with the social justice community is just ruled out as “alt-right” or some other buzzword that hasn’t been used to the point that it means nothing anymore.  But there is another side to it.  It’s because I don’t have a very high opinion of the anti-SJW community anymore.  They are just as bad as the social justice feminists that they deride.

It’s funny, but I remember when all of these groups came together during #GamerGate, and then subsequently went apart after it became clear that there was nothing to be gained from further cooperation.  I said this would happen during a live-stream I used to be a part of, back in the day.  My compatriots didn’t believe me then.  Wonder what they think now.

You all may be wondering – what does this have to do with the title of this post?  I’ll tell you.  See, a fair amount of comic book fans are all up in arms.  Why?  Because the new design for Black Cat in Sony’s exclusive Marvel’s Spider-Man doesn’t have her boobs on display!  That’s right, her cleavage isn’t hanging out of the outfit, so naturally they are all conspiracy theorizing that it is a big SJW conspiracy.  Saying that the character was written by the chick who said the tea-bag mod in GTA Online was “virtual rape.”  It is so frustrating to see this shit everywhere.

For starters, where are they getting that this character isn’t the same as she has always been?  I mean, did you play the game?  She is flirty as fuck with Parker.  Every audio-log you get on her quest in the main game has her talking in that sultry way where you know she is trying to goad Spider on.  It also hints of their past and how it was pretty complicated.

Next, have you seen her outfit?  Yeah, the outfit that is skin-tight, black, hugging every curve, that is not meant to be sultry at all.  Nope!  Not a little!  Morons.  Yeah, her boobs aren’t hanging out.  So that means…SJW?  I swear, these people can’t keep their bullshit straight.

Finally, did nobody pay attention to how this game is structured?  It’s definitely friendly for younger people.  Hell, the first outfit you have is pretty beat-for-beat similar to the one from The Animated Series.  Wanna know something interesting about that, for those who didn’t grow up in the 90’s?  In it, Black Cat didn’t have her boobs hanging out!  This game definitely breathes a vibe that it is modeled after the old animated series.  It wants to be played by kids.  Sure, the rating is T for teens, but how much foul language do you see in that game?  Not much.  It’s pretty marketable to the crowd it was intended.  You know what that means?  It means that you won’t have a character in it who has her tits hanging out!  Because that isn’t marketable to kids!  Did nobody pay attention?

In The Animated Series, Black Cat and Spider’s flirtatious relationship is all in subtext.  There’s a reason for that.  Because the series was made for kids, but there are teenagers in the audience who think that she is hot with that skin-tight black outfit.  It’s the same here!  I’m sorry that all the comic book nerds don’t get to cum in their pants over her.  I’m sure it must be so hard for you.

Grow the fuck up.

Until next time, a quote,

“Oh, poor Spider.  I know I disappointed you when I couldn’t go straight, but why mess with perfection?” – Black Cat, Marvel’s Spider-Man

Peace out,

Maverick

Advertisements

This is a Smear Piece of TotalBiscuit (A response to Forbes Magazine)

The very first thing to know about this article is that at the top, by the person’s name, it says that the opinions of this person are their own and not that of Forbes Magazine.  Well, fuck that.  This read like a hit-piece, and Forbes is shameless enough to put it on their platform.  This is an article that they want associated with their publication.  Hey, Erik Kain, you cool with this?  You cool with a publication you associate with putting out complete hit-pieces of respected gaming critics who died of cancer?  I’m sending you this, so I hope to get an answer.  Really, really am.  Though, we all saw your credibility die with the very thing this article talks about, so hey, let’s get down to it.

Some bitch on Forbes decided that instead of talking about the legacy of consumer advocacy (as opposed to Jim Stirling, who has agreed with Ben Kuchera that doxing is cool, so long as it’s somebody that they don’t like), she decided to talk about his connection with #GamerGate.  A movement that, four years later, still hasn’t died in the eyes of these people.  It never ceases to amaze how they are so quick to slander someone based on a movement that is dead.  But hey, let’s take a look at the article itself and see what this idiot is on about.  Here’s a link to the article, now let’s get into it.

The late YouTube Legend known as John “TotalBiscuit” Bain would have turned 34 on Sunday had he not lost his struggle to bowel cancer about a month ago. Instead of “Happy Birthdays” and tributes to his decade-plus career in the video game industry, however, his name is currently being evoked with the firing of two game developers and associated mob harassment. His critics call it “fitting” that this is Bain’s legacy… but many of his fans, some of whom have grown up with him, are wondering why some internet drama from 2014 is still relevant enough in 2018 to damage Bain’s brand forever.

TotalBiscuit has fuck-all to do with the firing of the Guild Wars 2 devs.  Nothing.  It’s being evoked with that by people who want to smear him for the purposes of…I don’t know.  It genuinely eludes me as to what is to be gained from besmirching the dead when they can’t defend themselves.  You all are the ones doing this.  Because you can’t talk about the fact that the dev in question who got the ball rolling took a COMPLETELY innocuous comment on her PUBLIC Twitter page (she did not set it to private) as an attack on her because of (insert gender politics) and decided to lambast him.  A guy who has said that he loves her work and even replied that he was not trying to offend her.  What followed was an insane outrage against the community and making it completely and utterly about (insert gender politics issue).

You all are the ones who did this, and now I am just DYING to know what TB has in common with this issue, seeing especially that it happened long after he died!

To progressives and what constitutes as “mainstream internet,” Bain was the man who legitimized GamerGate, the 2014 harassment-campaign-turned-consumer-revolt that went on to inspire conservatives.

What?!  What the fuck are you talking about?  When?!  When did he do this?  These people have such an insane view of what happened in the heyday of GamerGate.  It blows my mind.  For those who want a complete break-down, with all the main players involved, here’s a compilation of videos that Internet Aristocrat did about the whole thing.  He goes into great detail, and can clear up ALL of this bullshit.  Let’s take a look, then we can go further.

Wow.  So, in the very interesting story of what happened between the Quinnspiracy and GamerGate, I didn’t much about TotalBiscuit.  That’s funny.  I wonder why that is?  Could it maybe be because this woman is full of shit and looking to attack someone for reasons that I honestly couldn’t tell you?  I’m assuming that this woman is an SJW, and was just looking for a chance to get up on a pedestal.  That’s how these people do.  Well, let’s see what her reasoning is.

He could be described as the Anita Sarkeesian of the right in the current culture wars, always aggressive with his opinions but a bit thin-skinned to criticism himself. (He threatened to quit social media, Twitter and reddit a few times, for starters.)

I’m not getting this.  The Anita Sarkeesian of the right?  According to whom?  How do we know his politics?  You’re making a ton of assertions, and I haven’t seen anything he’s said himself that gives you insight into this.  This whole article is just you using other people’s statements to bolster your opinion.  What did TB say that clues you in to him being right-wing?  Specifically.  I want specifics, you stupid bitch.  You’re slandering a dead man, so I think he deserves that much.

As for him quitting social media, he said in a SoudCloud post that he was doing so because he was dealing with cancer.  I’m sorry that that makes him not as thick-skinned as you’d like.  He couldn’t deal with the stress of all his cancer stuff and the nonsense of social media at the same time.  Tell you what, sugar-tits, let’s see you get Stage 4 cancer and then be as popular as him on social media, where people are want to say inflammatory things (because male or female, it happens to everyone with large amounts of name recognition), and see how well you deal.  I’m sure that you will be the Paragon Virtue of being able to take the knocks without a scratch.  I’m a-quiver of curiosity to see it.

For someone so savvy at digital media preceding the incident, Bain’s involvement with GamerGate in 2014 can only be explained as a lapse in judgment. Up until that point he hadn’t yet been duped by any fake news campaigns perpetuated by organized online trolls.

Oh!  So all that stuff in Internet Aristocrat’s video?  Fake news?  What a crock.  Agree or disagree with his politics, IA did a very good break-down of what was happening, as it was happening.  He made those videos in the thick of it, following threads and forums and seeing the gaming media coming in solidarity of exposed collusion.  Because they couldn’t be honest about their mistakes.  Fuck that noise.  Instead, they have to get the gender politics train running, full steam ahead, and make it about that until the cows come home.

And there are so many details they missed.  Like how Brianna Wu lied about being driven out of her home.  She was doing TV interviews during that time via some kind of streaming.  It wasn’t something they set up.  And guess where she did those – from her office!  Five guesses where her office is.  Not to mention, Zoe Quinn saying she had to flee her home for another umpteenth time just happened to correlate nicely with her having a trip to Europe that she had announced months ahead of time.  There are SO many things that Internet Aristocrat missed, but I guess that this chick is just going to sweep it under the rug by calling it “fake news.”  That’s very SJW for ya.  I swear, anyone who uses the term “fake news” unironically is immediately put in my book as an idiot.

Unfortunately for Bain, his star power, white male privilege and massive fan base of more than a million could never change the narrative to the issue he wanted to discuss. Further, this mistake would eternally brand him as the face of a troll movement whose main claim to fame was making headlines for privacy breaches, hacking and various online crimes including harassing women out of their homes and threats of gun violence.

When was TB the face of GamerGate?!  Who did that?!  His name came up one time in a TwitLonger where he laid out his misgiving about the situation, but that was it.  You even cite it in your stupid fucking article!  All the names that got notoriety in all of this.  Internet Aristocrat, Mundane Matt, Eron Gjoni, Nathan Grayson, Adam Baldwin for coining the term, The Factual Feminist, none of them are TotalBiscuit!  Hell, I remember the Vivian James cartoon being more of a face of the movement, because the movement recognized it didn’t have a face!  This is so factually dumb!  This man has been saddled up to this fucking movement that you all are talking about all these years later because you feel like defaming him, and it fucking pisses me off!

You went on before about all the good that TB had done, as a way to set up how it doesn’t excuse him for the EVIL things that he has done here, but fuck that!  It’s telling how vague you are about the the EVIL things that GamerGate did.  Never mind that in Internet Aristocrat’s video that really got the issue blown up, he said right at the very beginning that he didn’t care that Zoe Quinn fucked five guys.  He cared about who those men were, and the ethical implications that went along with that.  Because they were giving her positive coverage.  IA made GamerGate into a household name.  Back when his channel existed, because he closed it out and made a new one, the views on those videos that the compilation was made from were insane!  You’re putting on a man who has no part in any of this, all of the blame.  It’s disgusting, and shame on you for doing it.  Let’s keep going.

I’m trying to find things to make a point about, but it’s impossible.  This article just goes on and on and on about how GamerGate is evil and anyone who says otherwise is “fake news” and that TB was somehow in the thick of it.  The fucking author even points out that TB only did that TwitLonger and didn’t engage past that.  He made his point and left it at that.  But now, somehow, because Anita Sarkeesian, he’s the figurehead of it?!  I am so fucking confused here.

Here’s what I’m seeing.  I am seeing someone who wants to talk about GamerGate as a thing.  I appears to be that TB’s name being included in all of this was just something to get people to click.  It’s click-bait.  Pure and simple.  Forbes published some click-bait bullshit that is fact-free, and all over the propaganda, to help push a narrative about an issue that these people won’t let die.  I can prove this, too.  Get a load of this statement.

While Gamergate faded away and lost relevancy except among progressive social media bubbles and white supremacists, TotalBiscuit as a brand separate from Gamergate continued to stay relevant among video gamers, both competitive and on Twitch and YouTube.

Did you see that?  The SJW has a brief moment of self-awareness because they have to flee back to the talking points that they want you to know are the real talking points.  And to hell with anyone who thinks otherwise!  This is her pulpit, dammit, and all of us have to agree with her.  From there, she goes on and on about GamerGate and some tangential relation to TotalBiscuit, when there is none!  None!  Nobody remembers him for his contribution into this culture war except for you lot!

Maybe you’re mad that two Bioware employees (one former, one current) besmirched him and were publicly lambasted to no end.  Is that it?  I don’t think so.  She threw every SJW big issue except the kitchen sink at this post.  Anita Sarkeesian, the Guild Wars 2 devs (an issue which has fuck-all to do with TB since it happened over a month after his death) getting fired, whatever you could find to throw into this, and however tangentially, lay at the feet of a dead man.  It’s fucking bizarre.

Which brings me back to what I began this article with.  This is what Forbes wants associated with their publication.  Complete and utter click-bait, and used the name of a popular, dead critic in order to have a pulpit to bitch.  I find this asinine in the extreme, and unethical.  This was an editorial, masquerading itself as a straight news story.  Huh, if only there had been a movement about this sort of nonsense being in mainstream publications.  Like, one that had been building for years and then broke open when one person decided to DMCA a video talking about it. Hm, I wonder what kind of big event that would be?  A fucking mystery to me.  What about you?

Until next time, a quote,

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.” – H.L. Mencken

Peace out,

Maverick

Lucien’s Unpopular Opinion: This Trans Actor Debate is Stupid

I am getting so tired of how every stupid thing these days is some big cultural issue that for some reason, people believe I need to feel strongly about.  I remember when the Ghostbusters reboot was coming out, and everyone was screaming about “woman power!” and I couldn’t have cared less.  It was all such bullshit in my eyes.  Then there was Black Panther, where the Internet was all in arms about how this was some huge breakthrough for black people and it was a revolution in Hollywood.  Never mind that the actual film was generic and boring, while another film starring a black cast talking about a much stickier issue came out and these people were dead silent.  Don’t know what I’m talking about?  It’s called Moonlight.  A movie talking about being black and being gay.  Given the homophobia in the black community, that film was much more audacious piece of work.

But as is always the case, when it’s some big Hollywood film, it’s a huge cultural battlefield.  When it’s a smaller film that is made 1000X better, it gets totally ignored.  That’s the fate of the aforementioned film.  And speaking of woman power, there was the film in February, Annihilation.  Starring five interesting women and being a smart science fiction film.  Not to mention having a scene that scared the living shit out of me.  It’s good stuff.  Nobody said a word about that.

Which brings us to now.  It was recently announced that there would a biopic about a transgender activist with Scarlett Johansson in the starring role.  Of course, the Internet busy-bodies are all over yelling.  Why?  Because she’s not trans.  And they think only a trans actress should play this role.  For fuck’s sake.  I’m gonna need a specific example for the point I’m about to make, and thankfully, I have one.

How many of you have seen the film Boys Don’t Cry?  It starred Hilary Swank and was a story about a trans man who was beaten, raped, and eventually murdered because of their transgender identity.  It was a really good movie.  Swank brought that character to life for all of the good sides of him and the bad ones.  Brandon Teena was not a perfect person, and the film didn’t shy away from that.  It was good that they didn’t, because it makes his inevitable murder all the more tragic.

I’ve heard this song and dance before.  I forget what the movie was, but there was some film about gay people that starred a straight person, and all of them were up in arms about the whole thing.  Everybody lost their collective shit, and I didn’t care then just like I don’t care now.  Because my point in all of this is simple – I would rather have a good actor/actress play a role than a bad one.  There is a vast plethora of movies that show that Johansson is an extremely talented actress.  Can you find me a trans actress who has the same chops?  If so, fantastic.  If not, shut the fuck up.

And for those who say “this is erasing the trans identity from this role,” please fuck off.  Why is it that you would be just fine with a film made worse by a mediocre or outright bad actress instead of a film that shows you all in a light that looks better because of a proven performer?  I genuinely don’t get this.  I mean, it’s not like some crap has been made that markets a trans actress as their headliner only for what they created the fucking suck, right…?

Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to bring a community to life in a good way with a proven actress, the way Sean Penn did with Milk, you all have to bitch and moan about stupid bullshit.  You have a chance to be noticed in a bigger way, to a wider audience, maybe help people empathize with your community more.  But no!  Let’s complain about who is in the fucking movie.  Because that’s the way to get things done.

I am getting so tired of the SJW community bitching and complaining about every stupid fucking thing, all so they can get their good-boy/girl brownie points and have everyone knowing how “woke” they are.  What they fail to understand is that all of this bitching won’t help their community get represented.  In fact, it’s likely to have the opposite effect.  Why?  Because if all they are going to do is berate and complain and moan at creators who are trying to get them noticed, you know what those creators are going to do?  Stop making films about them.  Because they won’t want to deal with the backlash.

See, Hollywood doesn’t actually give a shit about you and your community.  Actors and actresses and even some directors might, but the industry itself doesn’t.  They care about money.  They will preach the SJW line as long as it makes them money.  But it’s not anymore.  People are getting tired of it.  It’s why The Last Jedi and Solo were such flops.  Films with bad writing, piss-poor characters, and needing to shoe-horn in SJW preaching.  People are starting to get bored with this, and I can’t blame them.  It’s tiresome.  All of the hand-wringing and everyone arguing.  It’s why I have been unsubscribing from more and more anti-SJW YouTubers I followed.  I just don’t give a shit anymore.

To trans people, if you can’t see why your hand-wringing on this bullshit is not doing you any favors, then when my eventuality comes to pass, you will have no one but yourselves to blame.  Good luck with that.

Until next time, a quote,

“Welcome to the new age – Gen Zed.  Where we hustle people.  Where we blind-side them with bullshit, and use inclusivity and diversity as a smokescreen, while we sell them $25 t-shirts.  Where we hype up that we have a trans actress, like that means anything.  Like that’s important.  Like the show is better or worse because of it.” – Mister Metokur

Peace out,

Maverick

Your Beliefs About Art and #MeToo are Stupid (A response to Amanda Petrusich)

I’ve long had the contention that the whole #MeToo thing has become a witch hunt at this point.  My favorite was when they went after Bill Clinton.  Are you kidding me?  For what?  Never, at any point, did Monica Lewinsky say that he forced himself on her.  She knew EXACTLY what she was doing – fucking the most powerful man in the world.  If you gotta have a sugar daddy, that’s the one to get.  There was that lady who accused Morgan Freeman of sexually harassing her when her own video clip she used as evidence shows that he didn’t.  He wasn’t even talking to her when her alleged harassing statement was said.  It’s bananas.  Now we have a woman on PBS (a network whose SJW ties I have documented in the past, like with their short-lived gaming channel) saying that it’s time to divorce the art from the artist and hate all the works.  I’ll have the video below so you can see I’m not taking things out of context.  Let’s get to it.

This woman begins her statement by saying that divorcing the art from the artist is a bad thing.  The argument is that this is a bad statement because so much of what is remembered strongly is because it “is personal.”  Well, yeah, to the viewer or listener or player or whatever art form they take in.  When listen to Rolling Stones’ “Brown Sugar,” I am reminded that it has some VERY racy issues.  It rides a line.  But it’s still good music.  There are lots of things that touched me a personal level without having anything to do with the one who made it, because it’s my own personal perspective.

Of course, aside from video games, that was works of years gone by.  What new movies have touched me that personally?  VERY few and far between.  Culture is becoming so sterile and safe and vapid.  I’m bored by what I see because it doesn’t challenge my perceptions.  You want us to go away from this?  Okay.

She says her job is to put music in context of the time period that it comes from.  Okay.  That’s fine.  Lots of music that SO many people bitch about today is from eras gone by where people didn’t have all the butthurt problems we do today.  That’s part of what makes it good.  From the days when people could have the balls to sing about how God is bullshit and the youth are being poisoned by the adults the way Marilyn Manson did.  Or that love hurts and can kill you inside to the point of suicide, the way Nirvana did.  How I wish we still had the balls to do that now.

Then we get to her saying that divorcing the art from the artist is “outdated and dangerous.”  There better be a REALLY good reason why in this monologue.  She says that we can’t separate a song from the time period because we like it or that it’s fun to dance to.  Um, yeah we can.  People do it all the time!  It’s why we have people who have different tastes in music.  Parents thought that Manson was poisoning children and teaching them to become school shooters.  Didn’t stop people like me from liking his music.  This argument is bullshit.

We then get her saying we have a duty to rebuke the works of people who have done bad things, regardless of quality.  Okay then, I guess Ender’s Game is now a bad book because the author was a virulent homophobe.  I guess H.P. Lovecraft’s work all sucks now because he was a virulent racist.  I guess Se7en is now a bad movie for starring both Morgan Freeman and having Kevin Spacey in it.  The latter being a proven bad dude, and the former being a recent witch-hunt victim.  Right?  No, bitch.  That’s not how this works.  There are PLENTY of people that I have personal disagreements with, yet can admire when they create works that I find beautiful.

I think that Ashly Burch is an SJW who has dumb ideas in that vein, but I also think she’s a pretty great voice actress.  I think that Neil Druckmann takes what Anita Sarkeesian says REALLY seriously, sometimes to the detriment of his works, but he can still write great stories.  You don’t get to choose what people find poetic or touching or whatever.  If the person who created that is a bad person, then I will think – wow, it’s amazing that such a dick-mule could create something this good. What’s the problem with doing that?

She then says that even though she likes the music of R. Kelly and XXXtentacion, she feels uncomfortable liking their work because that somehow endorses violence against women.  How?!  I like this song, audience, so go abuse or piss on women!  That’s not how that works.  That’s not how anything works.  This argument hinges on the idea that somehow, internally, the liking of the works of morally questionable people reflects on you as a person.  Well I’ll tell you what – I don’t know thing one about Troy Baker as a person, but I know that he is a brilliant voice actor.  He portrayed the main character in one of my favorite games of all time – The Last of Us.  Since that work was created by Neil Druckmann, even if I find out tomorrow that he likes to sodomize Lena Dunham’s leftovers after she is done with her sisters (that woman is a pedophile.  How is she so popular?), I will still love his work in that game.

We get the argument that this isn’t censorship.  I would agree.  This is you having stupid opinions about music based on social nonsense that you believe because you are part of a movement that tells you that this is how the world is.  That the Anita Sarkeesian types are right and if you like things made by bad people, that in turn makes you a bad person.  That life doesn’t just mimic art, but it mimics the value of those who make it, regardless of if they are just the actors or lyricists in someone else’s work.  An asinine, stupid idea said by someone who is informed by the likes of BuzzFeed and Salon.

But she says that Spotify is bad for playing the music of the aforementioned rappers.  If you want to have an outlet not play music that you find offensive, that is censorship.  Because you are free to have your opinions about whatever musician you want.  However, you don’t get to choose which artists other people listen to, all because of the social justice chip on your shoulder.  Sorry life doesn’t work that way, sug.

She wraps up by saying that art and artist are indistinguishable.  That’s…bullshit.  Look at any piece of artistic work.  Aside from paintings and sculptures and whatnot, pretty much all mediums have some kind of balancing system.  As an example, if I am writing a book, and I want to publish it, I can either pay the cost of publishing it myself and get to have whatever I want in the book, or I can get a publishing company to do it and get a small percentage of the royalties.  If the publishing company does it, then they will be getting editors to go over my work and find the things that they believe need to be cut.  If I want them to stay my publishers, then I can try and plead my case for why not, or I can capitulate, but that’s the state of things.  In movies, the process of creation goes through so many draftings and shoots and are colored by so many people that there is no one person whose vision is represented.

You say that we cannot separate these things because they are indistinguishable.  I say that is ridiculous.  Movies, books, video games, music, pretty much any artistic creation is the collaborative efforts of many, many people.  The musician may be an incredible lyricist, the actor/voice actor an amazing performer, or the writer a fantastic narrative-weaver, but in the end, they are still just one cog of a much larger whole.  The fact that you cannot see that means you are just like every SJW I have seen make this bullshit, pretentious argument.  Well done.

Until next time, a quote,

“But let me tell you something, folks – you can’t fix stupid.” – Ron White

Peace out,

Maverick

Let’s Bitch About Games Not Being Happy for LGBT People! (A response to Kotaku)

I am genuinely not surprised what a giant pile of shit Kotaku is.  It was started under Gawker, so it should have surprised no one.  But every time I see their articles I am reminded of all the bad things about modern “games journalism.”  It’s a joke, and the punch like is that someone, somewhere, takes this shit seriously.  Who this person is and why is a complete mystery to me.  So when I saw an article with the title “Let Queer Characters Be Happy,” my groaning senses immediately were blaring.  I thought for a while I’d just let this stupid shit lie, because it’s more click-bait for SJWs so they can be reaffirmed why video games are awful.  Even though I guarantee that almost nobody who reads this shit and takes it seriously has ever actually played on.  Here’s a link to this bullshit article, now let’s get started.

When The Last Of Us Part II’s new trailer debuted at this year’s E3, protagonist Ellie enjoyed a slow dance and kiss with another woman. My queer friends and I confessed to one another that we were assuming the worst. That happy girl will probably die, because while games allow us to be many things—space marines, mages, and tenacious heroes—they rarely allow queer people to be happy.

Assuming the worst was a safe assumption.  That was mine as well.  I figure that the motivation behind Ellie being willing to go down the violent path that I get the feeling she has tried to escape is the death of India lesbian.

Oh, and boo-fucking-hoo about “they rarely allow queer people to be happy.”  Yeah, because Joel was SO happy in the last game.  Seeing his daughter die in front of him, scared and crying, which broke him inside to the point that he locked his humanity away for fear of being hurt like that again.  Yeah, he had a great time.  Life was all buttercups and rainbows for that mother-fucker.  If I didn’t know that all of this crap was just to get SJW brownie points for how “woke” you are, I’d think you are idiots.

Queer people struggle, as do our intersectional allies. The news is full of horrible daily reminders to all marginalized people that their lives and comfort exist largely at the whim of the privileged. That means bakeries refusing to make your wedding cake or laws meant to keep you out of restrooms.

That struggle has been fetishized by media and is one of the defining traits for queer characters in media. Video games have included more queer characters in recent years—Dorian in Dragon Age: Inquisition, Ellie in The Last of Us, Veronica Santangelo in Fallout: New Vegas and countless others—but all of their stories are tragic. Their partners and lovers are killed. Their families disown or shun them. They seem to be magnets for catastrophe. Rarely do their stories end in comfort, either from others or the larger world in which they live. We have more gays, trans-people, bisexuals, and others games than ever before. Yet we, comparatively, also have more of their corpses.

Fetishized?  What bullshit.  In all of those games that you list, the death or tragedy of their lives is painted as a bad thing.  When it it ever meant to be literal or emotional wank-material?  I hated the death of Riley in the DLC to The Last of Us, but that’s because when you listen to Ellie explain it, it wasn’t some big uplifting speech.  It was two girls who didn’t know what to do.  Ironically enough, I liked the original game’s portrayal of her dying better.  Because it felt like a real kid.  These girls are 13-14 years old.  They are NOT some big uplifting heroes.  The game painted Ellie as a normal teenage girl stuck in incredibly difficult circumstances.  It’s part of why I like her.

In that DLC, Riley is this amazing MLK-esque character who turns what should have been the tragedy that set Ellie on the path of self-destruction and watching the people she cares for die into a big “it’s gonna be okay” moment.  I hated that.  Meanwhile, in the actual game, Ellie paints the story as two girls in a place confused, scared, resigned to their fate.  They were going to “just lose our minds together.”  It’s tragic and depressing.  So yeah, Riley died, but if you go off the DLC, it was a magical and uplifting moment.  What are you bitching about?

It’s interesting that you complain about real life having reminders of things being difficult for LGBT people.  I don’t know if you were aware of this, but art mimics life, despite what Anita Sarkeesian likes to believe about it being the other way around.  So, since the real world has hurdles for them to overcome, so it is in the gaming world.  What a shock!

Not to mention that, once-again, this is another instance of me saying that if you want a game that is buttercups and rainbows for gay people, what’s stopping you from making it?  Do tell, what is preventing you from doing it?  Don’t know how to make games?  Learn.  Don’t know how to publish games?  Learn that Steam exists.  You all were able to get a house-cleaning simulator out to market, so one of you SJW fucks should be able to do this.  You want a game where it’s a magical utopia where Sarkeesian is on a pedestal and LGBT people are treated like they are princes among men?  Go out and make it, you complaining fuck!

They go on and on with example of how sad stories are represented with LGBT characters, so I’m going to jump back to where they make a point.  If you want to go through every example, you can read the article.  I have the same refutation for all of them, so it will make this simple for you here.

Tragedy often serves as a backstory for straight characters in role playing games, too. Party members of all backgrounds hide hidden pasts and personal struggles that the player can learn about and solve. But where the mighty Krogan warrior Wrex might rise to lead his species, and the dwarf Varric Thetras ascend to nobility, queer characters’ happy endings often end up being as romance options for the player. We are, more often than not, unsaveable unless we are fuckable, and even that is up to the player.

Wow.  So much to talk about here.  For starters, you talk about the shuttle pilot Cortez and how his story is focused around the death of his husband.  I actually despise the romance option for male Shepherd because he goes form grieving husband to immediately wanting to jump your bones.  Instead, let’s take a look at the story with Femshep.  There, you have a diligent Commander (which I most-assuredly am) working to help an ally and new friend get through his grief for his lost spouse.  In the end, it solidifies their relationship, both as commander and subordinate, and friends.  Plus, you helping him get through his personal issues saves his life on the final mission.  And my hatred of everything after the Victory Fleet goes to Earth aside, that seems like a damn good end to a story where they are “unsaveable unless we are fuckable”.  Fuck this smug hipster who wrote this shit.

What are you looking for?  A character who is an idyllic monarch of gay pride who leads the gay people on a gay as fuck revolution to glory?  It’s ironic that you list Wrex from Mass Effect on there, since him rising to glory is also something that depends entirely on the player!  You could have killed him when you have a standoff during the Virmire mission.  You could have destroyed the data on the Genophage cure in Mordin’s loyalty mission, which would lead to Eve’s death, which is crucial to him becoming a savior as she helps to rally the other clans under Wrex’s banner.  You also could kill Mordin, sabotaging the Genophage cure that is what saves the Krogan people from destruction.  All of his rise to glory is on you!  The player!  So what’s that bitching about all of this being at the mercy of the player?!  Pure bullshit?  That’s what I thought.

Games that include queer romance sometimes even place the success of that romance in competition with the success of society as a whole. In Life is Strange, teenager Max Caulfield saves her childhood friend Chloe after unlocking the ability to manipulate time. Throughout the rest of the game’s episodes, the two women get closer and closer, and the budding seeds of romance bloom between them. But Chloe already has lost one lover before the game even begins. Life Is Strange revolves around the search for Chloe’s missing girlfriend Rachel Amber. That search uncovers a string of sexual abuse and murder in the town of Arcadia Bay, with Rachel as one of the victims. After uncovering her body, Chloe gets killed by the culprit. That’s two dead gays for the price of one.

Oh fuck off!  Leaving aside that Max’s ENTIRE GOAL for the latter portion of Episode 5 is to save Chloe’s life (they ignore context like it’s the plague.  The Kotaku formula), this is just like that fucking “Dead Lesbian Syndrome” video that BuzzFeed made.  Yeah, Rachel Amber was dead.  It is tragic.  But you ignore several crucial facts leading up to this.  First, we never definitively know that the two of them were a thing.  It’s implied, heavily, but you never know.  Not to mention, we find out in Episode 3 that if they were a thing, Rachel Amber was cheating on her with the drug dealer, Frank.  And lying to her about it.  Oh wait, can’t talk about that.  Then you have a character who has flaws and shouldn’t be put on a pedestal.  My bad.

Yet, even when Max alters reality to save her friend or bring her happiness, Chloe suffers. In an alternate timeline where Max prevents Chloe’s father from dying, Chloe ends up in a car crash and is paraplegic. In this timeline, Chloe begs Max to euthanize her; the story shuts down both disabled and queer people’s right to happiness in one fell swoop.

Fuck this stupid article.  What a way to miss the fucking point!  The point of what made the death of Chloe in the alternate timeline Max created tragic.  This wasn’t about LGBT romance, you fuckers!  It was about Max fucking up her friend’s life again and again.  It’s talked about in Episode 5.  See, Max has fucked up Chloe’s life a lot.  She watches her die at the very beginning of Episode 1.  It’s what sets off her powers.  In Episode 2, you can have her shoot the bumper of a car, which causes her to shoot herself, forcing you to go back in time to save her again.  In that same episode, you have to stop a train from hitting her.  Which leads us to Episode 4, where she has created an entirely new timeline, specifically to make Chloe happy by not having her dad die, and finds out that this fucked up either her friend or her budding romantic partner’s life even more!  The tragedy in having to help Chloe die is in Max realizing that she has destroyed this girl’s life over and over again, only to go back to try and fix it.  In the end, she realizes that she can’t save keep doing this.  That all of these trips back through time are destroying her.

Just once, I wish that Kotaku would actually pay attention.  But no.  They have to get their talking points down so that they can stand in judgement over us EVIL gamers and the games we play.  I just know they’re going to talk about the ending, so let’s get to it.  Here I might find at least SOME common ground with them.

In a timeline in which Max prevents Chloe’s murder, a massive hurricane barrels down on Arcadia Bay instead. The pair conclude that the storm is an anomaly created in response to Max’s time-traveling. The final choice is to either sacrifice the town or to travel back in time and allow Chloe to die.

Narratively, the choice feels empty. Max’s personal growth up to this point revolved around a growing understanding of her place in society and learning to accept consequences for her actions.

I could not agree more!  I do hate the ending to Episode 5.  It is worse than the ending to Mass Effect 3.  None of your choices matter in the slightest, because either you negate ALL of them by having Chloe die, or they don’t matter because everyone is dead.  It was the laziest fucking way to end a choice-based game since Mass Effect 3.  Hell, it was lazier than that.  At least that game gave you 3 nonsensical choices that throw all your choices in the trash.  This game gave you two.  I wrote an entire post about how I would have ended things (link here), and while it isn’t perfect, at least I included SOME kind of choice-based resolution to the game.

The Last of Us focuses on the frailty of society and individuals, both morally and in the flesh. It makes sense that the characters would endure loss. Joel copes with the death of his daughter and his grief over his inability to protect her; he gravitates to Ellie, who serves as a surrogate child and a bittersweet balm for his prior loss. In the end, he gets what he wants — to serve the Hero Dad role — although it comes at the expense of many lives and lies.

What a way to miss the point.  Miss EVERYTHING that made the ending to The Last of Us so powerful.  The ending to that game isn’t some happy ending for him.  It’s bittersweet as fuck.  If you can’t see why, I shall explain.  Joel sold humanity up the river to save the only person left who matters to him.  His connection to the human condition.  You saw how his own brother and him are so estranged.  This one life, this one little life who has become his connection to the human condition, is worth selling all of humanity up the river to maintain.

In the end, he had to lie to Ellie about why he left the Fireflies base, because he knew that Marlene was right.  Ellie would want to give her life to save humanity.  What made their final conversation so powerful was in him accepting his cost, that last of his vestige of humanity, to preserve this relationship.  But it was also about Ellie accepting her cost.  She chose to accept his lie, knowing that it was a lie.  She could see all over his face that he was lying to her, but chose to accept that because she wasn’t just his surrogate daughter.  He is her surrogate father.  The one relationship that will last.  Because she found what Joel had back in the diner.  When she hacked David to pieces, she found that darkness that Joel had embraced, and since now she couldn’t give her life to escape it, she had to live with it.

I love the end of that game so much because of the moral and philosophical implications, and you just sweep it under the fucking rug as a story of Joel being the “hero dad.”  Fuck you, you single-digit IQ hipster.

I want these queer characters to have happy endings, or at least different ones. Hell, I’d settle for kisses that don’t portend death. And I still love the stories that I have, imperfect and tragic though they may be. BioWare’s cast of heroes provide examples of bravery and humility that I strive to emulate. Life is Strange’s tender romance captures a sense of early sexual awakening. The Last of Us’ Ellie is a goddamn survivor. All of that is fantastic, but it comes at a price. That price, often, is the agency and happiness of queer characters.

Does the writer of this article not know that these people aren’t real?  This is why I said that this feels like the video from BuzzFeed.  Because it reads like this person can’t separate fiction from reality in her mind.  Want these characters to have a happy ending?  Fantastic, there’s millions of fan-fiction sites that I’m sure have some happy endings for them.  Hell, read my post about how I would have ended Life is Strange.  There’s a happy ending for ya!  Instead of respecting the artistic integrity of those who create fiction, you have to bitch about it not being happy enough for you.  Well guess what, sugar-tits, you can go and find your happy ending or make it yourself on you Fanfiction.net or your Deviant Art page.

But why do we have to pay that price, and so often? I’m not suggesting that the queers should always get to dance in a field of gumdrops at the end of every game in which they appears, but considering the real world’s continued eagerness to trample the marginalized, one of the most radical things art could do right now would be to show us a world in which we are more than our suffering.

“More than our suffering”?!  Are you fucking kidding me?!  Is that all you see them as?!  You only see Chloe Price as suffering because her *potential* girlfriend died?  You only see Ellie as sad because of her dead girlfriend?  Wow.  What an insult to all the character traits that they had.  If that is all you see them as, that’s on you, honey.  I see Chloe Price as a tragic character, to be sure, but that’s because she’s had a rough life.  Her father died.  Her best friend deserted her.  The girl that she cared for more than any other and saved her potentially from suicide disappeared.  It’s what makes the dynamic better and her and Max reconnect and awaken new feelings into each other.  It’s why I hate the bullshit ending to the game so much because the choices make no difference.

But all of this comes right back to what I said before – if you want gay happy endings for characters, then go out and make it.  Make a game with a Star Trek utopia where gay people are treated as absolutely perfect because of their gayness.  I don’t fucking care.  But STOP bitching about things that you clearly only see as “there’s dead characters in the group I like!”  There is NOTHING stopping you from making the games you want to see.  How about you quit bitching on this SJW rag and get to work?

Until next time, a quote,

“Those who can’t do teach, and those who can’t teach teach gym.” – Dewey Finn, School of Rock

Peace out,

Maverick

SIONU: Finding Myself at Odds With Nerd Culture

Everywhere I look, I am noticing something.  Since I follow an amount of anti-SJW types one all sides of the political fence, I get exposed to lots of different ideas.  I even have some SJW types who at least will talk with the opposition that I follow, such as Laci Green.  I don’t want to live in an echo chamber, so I am doing my best to get as many perspective as I can.  I also follow the GamerGate page on Tumblr, that still posts to this day, and that’s where I am seeing a lot of this.  But on both sites, I am seeing a continuing perspective on certain games, and it has me confused.

I recently have played David Cage’s newest game, Detroit: Become Human, and I have liked it very much.  Connor and Hank were by far my favorite characters, with Kara and Alice being my least.  Their arc had some insane plot convenience that did take me out of the story.  The game isn’t perfect.  I’m the first to say that.  There are flaws.  The same flaws inherent in all David Cage games – wonky controls, narrative heavy in the extreme, QTEs that if you hate that stuff will get on your nerves.  But for what the game is, I do like it very much.

But then I pull up my social media and it’s thing after thing about how awful this game is, how it somehow signifies the end of the world for gaming.  How it is SJW-heavy and how I should hate it for that.  On and on and on.  What’s more, a gaming channel that I watch decided to shit on another of Cage’s games – Beyond: Two Souls, making the argument that Cage’s games have no audience.  The dude is welcome to his own opinion, I am just confused about why it was so awful.  Was the non-chronological order an issue? A little.  I would have personally liked more of the stuff like when she was doing her infiltration mission.  That shit was great!  Or the mission where she was on the run facing off with the military trying to hunt her down.  That mission was also great.  I can look past the flaws for the things that I like in it.  Am I the only one?

Then today, another person I follow on Twitter was asked if he would cover “Life is Cringe.”  An obvious spin on the game Life is Strange.  I have made no secret of how that was my favorite game of 2015.  I have gone on about it to the point of excess, and I won’t be going on here.  I am just curious what is so awful about it.  The stilted dialogue?  Don’t think that escaped my notice.  Sure, it is a little off-putting at first.  I had to adjust to it.  But once I was able to quantify it as part of the universe that this game exists in, I was able to enjoy it substantially.  But I do acknowledge the stilted dialogue as a flaw.  Made very clear of that in my review of the first episode.  So what is it, then?

People have pointed out to me that there is SJW themes at play in the game.  Chloe Price, my favorite character, has been savagely ripped to pieces by the Internet.  Is that the issue?  Here’s the thing about me – I don’t hate a game or character with SJW parts on the merits of their existence.  Not so long as the narrative or the character doesn’t make those parts the majority of the whole.  It’s why I can hear her talking about keeping the gun she has out of the hands of men and not just write her character off.  Because that is one small part of her overall whole.

I’m trying to get where the hate of all these things is.  What are other people seeing that I am not?  Or is it the reverse?  Am I seeing something that everyone else is too obtuse to see?  Is my ability to see nuance and not just hating something because it has elements of a movement that I personally disagree with giving me a perspective others lack?  Or am I completely wrong and there is nothing of any redeemable value in any of these things?

Where did this all get started?  One could say that this goes back to the review for Gone Home.  A game that the games media slobbered all over the knob of like it is one of the greatest games ever.  A contention that I most assuredly do not agree with, make no mistake.  That game also has flaws, though I believe that people’s belief that it is nothing but a “walking simulator” is a bit overstated.  I liked the previous work by that company Dear Esther.

Game after game that I enjoy, but the Internet that I follow despises.  Firewatch, Beyond: Two Souls, Everybody’s Gone to the Rapture, Life is Strange, Detroit: Become Human.  What am I missing?  I have even seen people accusing the game L.A. Noire of being in the same vein as this.  WHY?!  Because you spent a lot of time talking with people?  You know, the most fun part of the game!  Instead of that boring driving and shooting shit?!  Where you analyzed crime scenes and interrogated witnesses?  I loved that part.  It bugged me how the less interesting parts of the game had to be there at all.  I would have loved a game all about crime scenes, solving crimes, and being a detective.  It could have spawned a new breed of game.  Instead, it bankrupted the developer and that was it.  There will never be a sequel.

Come on, you nuance-lacking mother-fuckers!  Tell me what I’m missing here!  Tell me where the hate comes from.  Is it the simplistic gameplay?  Is it the narrative focus instead of the mechanics focus?  Is it the thematic elements that tie in to a culture that modern gaming is so at odds with?  Tell me what it is.  I genuinely am trying to figure that out.  Because while there are lots of games that I really like, it starts to feel like I am the only one on my side of the fence who agrees.  I’ve never actually been called an SJW for my taste in gaming, but part of me wonders if that is people’s unstated opinion.  I just want clarity on what I am missing here.

Feel free to comment, whoever.  I let all opinions be heard.

Until next time, a quote,

And as I sat there, looking out into the darkness, I thought back on all the things I’d built and left unfinished. I realized something – I wasn’t sad that it was gone. I had had fun making all that stuff. I would have done it anyway. And then, somehow, I knew that when I woke up, all my work really would be destroyed.” -King, The Unfinished Swan

Peace out,

Maverick

Musical Insanity: Vegan Rap

There is a rule that I want to make.  It’s a simple rule, really.  One that should be understood by everyone at this point to be a law.  No joke, break this and I am going to send a fucking honey badger to your house that’s high on Angel Dust.  Yeah, that’s how serious this rule is.  Because between the Privilege Rap to what you are going to see, it is abundantly clear that this rule has a very real place in today’s society.  Actually, this is two rules.  First, stop raps that have a lesson to teach!  They are awful!  Without a single exception, they all suck!  Stop it!

Next – white people need to never rap.  Ever.  We suck at it.  I don’t like rap in general, but the cringing I did on this was even worse than the “Jesus Christ is my Nigga” rap.  By the way, check that out if you want some old white people cringe that is just the best.  If cringe is something you look for.  I can’t handle the white people rapping about feminism, and I most certainly can’t help the most outspoken and annoying group I have had to deal with offline doing this.  Let’s take a look at the Vegan Rap.  Ugh…

Where do I begin.  For starters, we have the older people trying to be hip for the youth at least staying with the beat.  But their lyrics.  It rhymes for the first paired lines, but then we have this skinny guy come in and interrupt the second pair with the moral lesson – don’t use animal as an insult.  Bitch, I’ll use whatever I like as an insult.  But I’m not calling fatties a cow.  I’m calling them a heifer.  Get your terminology straight.

Next up we have the lady saying if you eat like a pig, she won’t use that term with you.  I will.  If someone eats shit food like a hog, they’ve earned the terminology.  Oh right, I’m fat-shaming.  Too bad.  If you are going to slobber down slop in front of me, I’m judging you for it.  Any friend of mine knows that I’m an asshole.  That’s part of my charm.  But then this skinny dude comes back to interrupt the next rhyme again with this woman.  Now he has a prolonged lesson to teach – that using animals as an insult is “speciesist.”  When will SJWs get this term added to the dictionary.  We’ve already god mansplaining in there, so why not?

I feel so bad for these people trapped in this terrible rap with this skinny guy.  It’s so abundantly clear that he is the driving force behind this, and these people are stuck there.  It reminds me of the podcast I watched called Drunken Peasants.  They had this woman and her public access show, who talked about dick endlessly, and she had this older woman with her whose only job seemed to be reacting to the crazy shit she said.  That woman looked trapped, and I felt bad for her.  I feel bad for these people too.

There is an abrupt transition to the guy singing again, saying that if you avoid thinking, he won’t call you a sheep.  I might not call you that either.  I’ll probably just call you stupid.  So there ya go, trapped guy.  I feel you on that one.  But I might call you a sheep if you blindly accept the stupid shit that those in power or the group goes with without thinking about it.  It is what it is.

We then go back to the lady, who says if you are a cowardly little bitch, she isn’t going to call you a chicken.  Neither will I, lady.  I’ll call them cowardly, little bitch, frightful, lacking guts, easily scared, wuss, pussy, or a cabal of other insults to insinuate that someone is lacking in courage.  Now the dude is back.  I guess he talks about his moral lessons after the woman speaks.  Okay.  The lines are the same, whatever, now I have to focus on this guy’s dancing.  There’s a website I want you all to check out.  It’s mancan.com.  I came across this at my employment.  If there isn’t a white background at the start when the page loads, refresh a few times.  Might take a bit.  But then you’ll have this white background appear, and in frame will come this dancing man.  He’s terrible.  It’s so beautifully cringey.  The joke I have my coworkers is that this man cannot.  Other mancan, but this man cannot.  It’s kind of an inside thing.  But looking at vegan skinny man, it make me think of that.

Now we’re back to the guy.  He says that if you are disloyal and we have a fight, he won’t call you a rat.  Okay, you have it right with the first bit, but not the second.  It’s not when we have a fight that you’re a rat.  It’s when I do something and you go to the authorities or one in charge of an organization or event and snitch on me.  Being snitch is what earns you that name.  And I’ll call you that if that’s what you’re being.  You look like a snitch.  No offense.

It goes over to the lady, and this one is just bizarre.  We have her talking about a person who checks ladies out being called a dog.  What?  For one, I call don’t call people a dog, I call them a bitch.  That’s a female dog.  Get your terminology straight.  Next, in the context of the usage of dog, it’s more someone who is a horny bastard and not ashamed of it.  So in both instances, your rebuking of this term is flawed.

Oh hey!  We do have someone calling out the usage of the term bitch.  Fantastic.  And I don’t call someone a bitch because they aren’t rich.  By the way, that’s actually a pretty good rhyme.  Your syllable usage can stand some work, but that rhyme was on point.  I call someone a bitch if they are being a pathetic, measly little worm that I don’t wanna give the time of day.  Or, if they are an unpleasant, awful human being, who is being unpleasant to me in a way only females can be.  Though if guy is so effeminate that he exhibits those behaviors, I’ll call him out on it too.

We have the lady back calling out the usage of the term “snake” for those who lie and break someone’s trust.  I always saw that as someone who stabs you in the back.  Or someone who pretends to be your friend and then betrays you.  I’ve used that term a few times.  We have the skinny guy back, and his dancing just gets worse!  These poor people.  I can feel them cringing with me on this.  Who was this made for?!

And it fades out with him and his repeated line. This was so much cringe.  I will likely never watch this again.  It wasn’t fun cringe.  I can watch “Jesus Christ is my Nigga” til the cows come home because it’s pretty funny.  This?  It was not.  Just the saddest attempt to reach an audience people that I don’t know who it is.  I don’t know who this is made for.  Vegans?  Non-vegans?  I don’t know.

Stop rapping, white people!  Not because it’s “cultural appropriation,” because that term is bullshit, but because you fucking suck at it!

Until next time, a quote,

“That was hilarious because you fucking suck!” – Your Movie Sucks

Peace out,

Maverick