Quote from: jhkim;1081523OK, so you're afraid of potentially being harassed, so you wouldn't want to sit down and game with Stacey. That's your choice. However, it seems to run counter to your earlier claim that "If someone of left wing views is happy to sit down and play a regular game of D&D with me then by definition they are not an SJW."

By what you initially said, if Stacey is willing to sit down and play a regular game of D&D with you, then you claimed that by definition they would not be an SJW. But I think that isn't the case. Even if they were happy to sit down and play D&D with you, you'd be afraid and refuse to play with them - and presumably you'd still consider them an SJW.

Don't know if my reasoning is the same as S'mon's, but my answer to this is that I don't want to play with her/him/it because when she/he/it said she was willing to just sit at my table and play, without dragging in the other stuff--I don't believe her/him/it.  I don't need much credibility to sit down and at least try a game with someone, but I need more than she/he/it has with me on this issue.

Such credibility issues are case by case, and can of course change over time.

Quote from: jhkim;1081523Can we take the NFL or other stuff to a separate thread in Pundit's forum, or just drop it? It really doesn't belong here in the RPG forum.

Welcome to the (post)modern world: where it's all politics, all the time.

Trying to shut it out won't make it go away.

Quote from: KaelThe ultimate goal of any modern society should be the avoidance of those things that lead to a dictatorship (single person in charge with absolute authority.)

See it's funny that you say that, because I'm a monarchist.

Quote from: jhkim;1081494I'm reasonably certain that I could easily sit down to a game table with them and play a game, just like I suspect I could sit down and play a game with most of the posters here.

No, you wouldn't.  Because they'd kick you out and then make sure you'd never be able to do anything, including feeding yourself and having shelter, because you're 'problematic'.  People like them, HAVE done this.

Quote from: Kael;1081526Yes! I always love it when I'm reminded that the political spectrum is circular.

Swing hard to the left and you end up in a socialist and communist single party system run by a dictator. See: Soviet Union, Cuba, China, and North Korea, Nazi Germany, etc.

Swing hard to the right and you end up in pure capitalist and anarchist system run by a warlord/druglord acting as a dictator. See: pretty much all of Africa and South/Central America.

Go old school and you end up with feudalism, empires, monarchies, papalities, etc. run by ... wait for it ...  a dictator. The ultimate goal of any modern society should be the avoidance of those things that lead to a dictatorship (single person in charge with absolute authority.)

It's not even a left/right issue at all. It's a "avoid the extremes" thing.

Capitalism probably would not work very well in an anarchy.  In fact I would not even rank it on a scale of Law - Chaos.

Dictatorships can work very well if you get the right person in place and dont care too much about human rights.  But if you ask me then I much prefer the chaos of democracy.

Quote from: Shasarak;1081533Capitalism probably would not work very well in an anarchy.  In fact I would not even rank it on a scale of Law - Chaos.

Indeed it wouldn't. For capitalism to actually work, it needs some central (i.e. socialist) oversight to prevent monopolies, otherwise it descends into a "winner takes all" anarchy. This oversight also can't fall under the power of a single person because corruption will occur without fail.

So, at this point, any unchecked power will eventually be consolidated into a dictatorship and hence the circular spectrum. All extreme roads, whether through the government or through private means, lead to a consolidation of power which inevitably ends up with a single person on top.

Some African and Central/South American situations are good examples of what happens when "the guy with all the guns and drug money" or simply "the richest dude" grabs control and the puppet government has no actual power. It's a laissez faire style of capitalism that leads to constant civil warring tribes/factions, which leads to true anarchy, that leads to a power vacuum with a single person taking control, usually by force and money. Rinse and repeat.

The flip side is a communist-style single-party government taking total control with a single person on top. Both avenues end up in the same place: dictator. The only difference is how you got there. In reality, a healthy mix of socialism/capitalism is needed to maintain proper socioeconomic balance and stability. Whether that mix should be 55/45 or 45/55, is a boring and endless debate that will rage on long after we are all dead.

However, as long as both sides have a voice and neither takes control, you end up somewhere in the middle of the pro-employer/pro-employee and nonprofit/max profit spectrum, which is where you want to be for steady, longterm growth.

In the middle east, there are still quite a few religious monarchies (i.e. dictators backed by drug and oil money), and those systems seem to be working out great for all the commoners that aren't born into the royal families as princes. /s

Quote from: jhkim;1081523As for the latter, I mess up pronouns all the time. With a bunch of transgender friends and acquaintances, it's hard not to. I've sometimes been mildly embarrassed about it, but that's about it. The point seems to buy into the idea that transgender people are so well protected now, that really it's the conservative people who have to fear the stigma if they use the wrong pronouns or otherwise cross them. I find that ridiculous. I've before suggested people try it for a day or so - just dress in opposite-gender clothing and go around doing normal things. For men in women's clothing, it has really crushing stigma to it - even in liberal areas. Overwhelmingly, most trans people just want to the relief of being treated like just another person.

I've mentioned this before, but I live in western washington in the tech sector. I would have no problem crossdressing to work. People here bend over backwards to be accomidating and inclusive. I get the HR emails every so often, reminding me that I live in progressive, left, social justice central. I'd get even more specific, but I don't want to out myself and get fired.

Quote from: jhkim;1081523OK, so you're afraid of potentially being harassed, so you wouldn't want to sit down and game with Stacey. That's your choice. However, it seems to run counter to your earlier claim that "If someone of left wing views is happy to sit down and play a regular game of D&D with me then by definition they are not an SJW."

By what you initially said, if Stacey is willing to sit down and play a regular game of D&D with you, then you claimed that by definition they would not be an SJW. But I think that isn't the case. Even if they were happy to sit down and play D&D with you, you'd be afraid and refuse to play with them - and presumably you'd still consider them an SJW.

She has amply demonstrated that she won't just sit down and play.

Maybe I should have made some caveats

- Has not demonstrated a hatred of 'straight white men', ie me

- Is willing to sit down and play without looking for an attack vector.

What I am trying to get at is that I GM/play with a lot of left-liberal people, some may have SJW friends, some may share the general worldview of SJWs, or at least think they do - but they don't behave like SJWs. It's the behaviour that matters.

(For me it's the same with someone on the Far Right - if they can keep quiet and play, I don't care about their opinions. But I do care about their behaviour, and they better not be harrassing any gay/black/trans players, or ranting at the table, or threatening me.)

Quote from: jhkim;1081523I've before suggested people try it for a day or so - just dress in opposite-gender clothing and go around doing normal things.

I don't think the radical Islamist students at my work would be too keen on that. The cultural Marxists among the staff would love it though!

Counterpoint, whatever your stance, you better accomplish that by playing in a session Friday night than posting on internet forums.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1081541Counterpoint, whatever your stance, you better accomplish that by playing in a session Friday night than posting on internet forums.

My next session is 08.30am (online) - just over an hour from now - followed by 2pm tomorrow (tabletop) , followed by 6pm Tuesday (tabletop). My previous sessions were Tuesday, Sunday & Saturday. It's possible to play plenty while still wasting lots of time on internet forums!

Quote from: S'mon;1081543My next session is 08.30am (online) - just over an hour from now - followed by 2pm tomorrow (tabletop) , followed by 6pm Tuesday (tabletop). My previous sessions were Tuesday, Sunday & Saturday. It's possible to play plenty while still wasting lots of time on internet forums!

Fine you get a pass.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1081544Fine you get a pass.

The secret lies in not having a TV, not regularly playing video games, and not spending too much time on Youtube or the newspapers.

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1081517Sure they do. What you're advocating is analogous to murder.

The analogy to self defense would be removing an SJW from your game.

Your right to self defense ends when you're actively hunting down the opposition.

No they don't, no I'm not, and no it doesn't when I am advocating we defend the RPG hobby as a whole.

Took me a bit but I see what you are trying to do here.

You keep using words like genocide, and murder, when I am talking about the RPG hobby.

Nothing I am advocating is in the same ballpark as genocide and murder. Not even in the same reality.

And could not be construed as such by any reasonable person.

You keep trying to say my words are equivalent to physical violence, when I have not advocated physical violence of any kind.

SJW's use a similar tactic. They equate the words of their opposition with 'literally hurting people' so that they feel justified in using physical violence as a response to people that they disagree with. Antifa does this in their rhetoric all the time.

Why are you doing it?

Quote from: jhkim;1081481Interesting. This is nearly exactly parallel to what I hear from liberal advocates to be safe from conservative harassment and intolerance. Do you think you would actually have common ground and could come up with common rules for gaming safe spaces with liberal advocates?

I would predict that you'll have a problem with how to define the hate that you want to ban. The very extreme of violence like fistfights are trivial to ban - and in fact, are already banned at all game conventions that I've seen. However, you'll find that most of what you consider SJWs operate much more subtly - like socially shunning conservative players, and/or running games where conservatives feel unwelcome. Then you'll either have to tolerate that hate, or you'll have to start trying to define and ban micro-aggressions against conservatives.



I'm left doubting what exactly it means to be an SJW for you. I play pretty regularly with people that I believe most posters here would consider SJWs (and heck, there are posters who consider me an SJW). They're enthusiastic about the X card, introductions with what pronouns to use, punching nazis, and so forth.

On the other hand, most of them are happy to sit down and play a game of D&D with me. (Some just don't like D&D but will play other games, which I assume is still OK.)

Greetings!

The problem with attempting to play with SJW's, Jhkim, is that SJW's are social misfits. They are mentally and emotionally unstable. SJW's often need "safe spaces" and are always worried about being "triggered" for some stupid psuedo-traumatic drama that so many of them claim to be an eternal victim of. SJW's are seemingly hyper-vigilant about proper "representation" and any kind of campaign which embraces "problematic" issues can cause them to spiral into a pearl-clutching frenzy. All of these deeply tortured and emotionally fragile people really shouldn't be attempting to game in a vibrant, diverse world. They need to be heavily medicated, and kept in special places where they can clutch their stuffed animal and watch endless reruns of bad soap-operas.

Conservatives are typically normal, emotionally stable and mature people that can play a game of D&D with different people--and without all of the deep emotional and psychological problems that seem to plague SJW's. It is that precise dynamic that has normal gamers cautious about playing with anyone that is a self-proclaimed SJW--or who might be. Like S'mon maintains, SJW's behaviour is deeply disruptive and entirely too swallowed up with drama for most people to tolerate--or even to contemplate dealing with. I can certainly understand S'mon not wanting Stacy to be at his table. I wouldn't either. People like that are like walking around with a backpack full of explosive eggs on them. You never know what anything--of a dozen things--usually entirely normal, innocuous, and mostly what everyone else considers to be reasonable, healthy, and fun--might suddenly offend the SJW and set them off on some Turretz-like emotional breakdown and sobbing fit.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Jaeger;1081548No they don't, no I'm not, and no it doesn't when I am advocating we defend the RPG hobby as a whole.

Took me a bit but I see what you are trying to do here.

You keep using words like genocide, and murder, when I am talking about the RPG hobby.

Nothing I am advocating is in the same ballpark as genocide and murder. Not even in the same reality.

And could not be construed as such by any reasonable person.

You keep trying to say my words are equivalent to physical violence, when I have not advocated physical violence of any kind.

SJW's use this same tactic. They equate the words of their opposition with 'literally hurting people' so that they feel justified in using physical violence as a response to people that they disagree with. Antifa does this in their rhetoric all the time.

Why are you doing it?

Greetings!

Razor-sharp, my friend. You always have to stay vigilant about how SJW's like to corrupt normal language, and subtly slip in loaded language to undermine you, and increasingly tighten the verbal screws on you so that YOU look and feel like some kind of monster.

BOOM! Great commentary, Jaeger.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK