: ***
I love how people make these big claims that go against the findings of pretty much every single psych organization and imply it's our own damn fault for being marginalized and then don't bring anything to the table to back it up. Don't try and tell an actual trans person what's wrong with them, okay?
: Imagine sticking your foot into a bear-trap and wondering how it caught you.
Lmao, what is this even supposed to mean.
: ***
"Hey let's make a cute icon to show solidarity with the LGBT community against hate!" is shoving ideology down peoples' throats? If it's making you choke that badly, there's nothing wrong with finding a different game to occupy your time.
: Once again and the final time i'll do it. BTFO. There is definitely a number difference but that doesn't mean both shouldn't be addressed. Also, no it is NOT simply jokes on twitter. Stop trying to push the problem under the rug to minimalize our issues. You only serve to divide, not to unite.
BBQ. Then feel free to actually make a case that it does exist, then.
: `You'll get one for straightphobia when straight people get beaten up, disowned, harassed, discriminated, murdered etc for being straight Aka, never` Once again, btfo'd. Please, don't respond if this is your idea of a retort.
You stated "You don't get brownie points and to claim you're the only one who has it tough in this world because you aren't straight." Nowhere did that poster make such a claim. Please, don't respond if this is your idea of a retort.
: Just because it isnt a majority doesn't mean it isnt its own problem. Just like how gays ARENT a majority yet their issues are still a concern. Why is that so hard to understand? Do I really need to theorize why you refuse to accept that this is a fact and real occurrence? It'll only become more and more an issue as people strive to try and deny it. This is an easy "Yes, I agree" statement. I don't know why you're pretending your problems are more important than everyones.
The problems of LGBT+ people are more important than problems that _literally do not exist_, yeah.
: This is exactly the kinda shit behavior that gets straight people treated poorly and their problems ignored so that others can feel different. You don't get brownie points and to claim you're the only one who has it tough in this world because you aren't straight. You ARENT special.
Good thing they're not claiming that, then.
: Heterophobia and yes it is a thing. There are people out there who hate straights just like others hate gays. Other argument is completely wrong though so i'll give you that.
It absolutely is not a thing, especially to the extent that homophobia and transphobia are. Again, you can't point out cases of people being murdered/raped/disowned by family/fired/imprisoned etc. for being straight.
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=Ag8jgd8Q,discussion-id=H9k0T2Fx,comment-id=000d0000,timestamp=2019-05-15T03:26:08.872+0000) > > Because transitioning is totally a thing that doesn't take years of treatment and doctoral approval even before "the surgery," assuming the person even does that at all (many don't, for a ton of valid reasons). > > And hell, even if that scenario did happen... that still doesn't invalidate the fact that transphobia is a massive issue in today's society. I never said transphobia wasn't a problem (haven't really seen much evidence, whenever there is transphobia people are quick to ruin the persons life no matter the reason), Im just saying that trans people have an almost 50% suicide rate, and don't act like its just because someone called them a bad name so just be careful.
If you never said transphobia wasn't a problem, then why did you say "I'm cool with this, except for trans"? And no, trans people don't kill themselves just because they're trans, that's ridiculous. It absolutely has to do with how society as a whole treats trans people. How many get disowned by family. How many are mistreated or fired by employers with little to no legal recourse. And yes, being called slurs. Reducing prejudice down to "someone calling someone a bad name" is frankly ignorant.
: I wonder if riot foresaw the possible divide this would create in the comments. on a serious note, I'm cool with this, except for trans... let me explain. I don't care if your trans, thats fine, but sometimes you don't actually want to be trans and are just gay but don't know it. At that point most of them are like "well, I have no money from the surgery, my body is messed up, time to end this". In short, if your gonna be trans then just wait to be completely sure first.
Because transitioning is totally a thing that doesn't take years of treatment and doctoral approval even before "the surgery," assuming the person even does that at all (many don't, for a ton of valid reasons). And hell, even if that scenario did happen... that still doesn't invalidate the fact that transphobia is a massive issue in today's society.
: I mean, cool? Still gonna call my homies gay in chat tho. Also, heterophobia should probably be in there too. I've seen it rise quite a bit with the overwhelming push to try and move what should be considered the status quo?
I'm sure you can point out the places where it is illegal to be straight, the places where killing a cis person is considered a justifiable act just because you think they're icky, and the places where cishet people are systematically marginalized by society as a whole. LGBT people making jokes on twitter is nowhere near the same level. Stop acting like it is.
: New stories and bios - Yuumi, yordles, and Draven!
Finally Lulu lore! I've been wondering how she'd fit in since the Yordle retcon. Pretty good! I love Tris's new bio. Yuumi's story is pretty cute, although it kinda sticks out that the rescued Yordle tells Yuumi that he hopes she finds her Yordle, when Yuumi never mentioned anything about her quest. TWD is absolutely amazing and just what I'd expect from a story starring Lulu and Tris. I really enjoyed the narrator as well, best support.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=notFREEfood,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=0000000000000001000100010000000000000001,timestamp=2019-05-08T22:51:40.160+0000) > > Civil cases have a different standard of proof. In a civil case, the plaintiff does not have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt; they just have to convince a jury that what they claim is more true than what the defendant claims. For example if you kill someone and the da decides not to prosecute you, your victim's family can still file a wrongful death lawsuit against you, and the lack of a criminal prosecution is not a valid reason to have it tossed. If a da doesn't think a case will have a string chance of victory, they won't prosecute. Such is the nature of the da being an elected position - a da with a low conviction rate is likely going to have opponents bring it up. > > Riot's arbitration clause may also run afoul of a recently passed california law. The California law has, for the parts that matter, been pre-empted by federal law. They haven’t even **tried** to have a criminal investigation conducted. They haven’t **tried**. They’re looking for their “15 minutes of fame” and to get a pay day. It’s immature and not acceptable.
Can you stop yammering on about criminal investigations for _civil_ offenses?
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100010001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T21:03:39.090+0000) > > It's almost like the sources are saying it's not a criminal matter. Then what is the problem? > Holy shit my guy, the _point_ of it being about the behavior is about the misdeeds being exposed in the public sphere, not to file criminal charges for something that _again_, is _not_ defined as a criminal case. The criminality can't be in question for something that isn't a criminal offense. Not _every_ shitty thing is a criminal offense. If it's a civil matter, and not criminal, why does it need "exposed" via a lawsuit? > What the fuck does this even mean. Lawsuits _deal with_ civil cases. If this is you whining about them not arbitrating, see above. So if it's not criminal, why can't they use arbitration? > _Exactly the fucking point._ It's _not_ a criminal case, hence why arbitration is being used. But they're not using arbitration, they're screaming that they need a lawsuit for some reason.
[Thoughts on this list, then?](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/arbitration-pros-cons-29807.html) There's just as many reasons to be against arbitration, and according to this arbitration does not always become public knowledge. There is also the limited recourse if the arbiter's decision is disagreed upon. I also fail to see how 4 is relevant, especially since a piece of journalism is the reason this issue has become as known as it has.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100010001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T21:03:39.090+0000) > > It's almost like the sources are saying it's not a criminal matter. Then what is the problem? > Holy shit my guy, the _point_ of it being about the behavior is about the misdeeds being exposed in the public sphere, not to file criminal charges for something that _again_, is _not_ defined as a criminal case. The criminality can't be in question for something that isn't a criminal offense. Not _every_ shitty thing is a criminal offense. If it's a civil matter, and not criminal, why does it need "exposed" via a lawsuit? > What the fuck does this even mean. Lawsuits _deal with_ civil cases. If this is you whining about them not arbitrating, see above. So if it's not criminal, why can't they use arbitration? > _Exactly the fucking point._ It's _not_ a criminal case, hence why arbitration is being used. But they're not using arbitration, they're screaming that they need a lawsuit for some reason.
Then I'm sure that you will have no problem explaining why and how that's the case.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100010001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T21:03:39.090+0000) > > It's almost like the sources are saying it's not a criminal matter. Then what is the problem? > Holy shit my guy, the _point_ of it being about the behavior is about the misdeeds being exposed in the public sphere, not to file criminal charges for something that _again_, is _not_ defined as a criminal case. The criminality can't be in question for something that isn't a criminal offense. Not _every_ shitty thing is a criminal offense. If it's a civil matter, and not criminal, why does it need "exposed" via a lawsuit? > What the fuck does this even mean. Lawsuits _deal with_ civil cases. If this is you whining about them not arbitrating, see above. So if it's not criminal, why can't they use arbitration? > _Exactly the fucking point._ It's _not_ a criminal case, hence why arbitration is being used. But they're not using arbitration, they're screaming that they need a lawsuit for some reason.
I genuinely have no idea how to explain to you that just because something isn't a criminal offense doesn't mean it's not shitty enough to a) sue over and b) expose to the public.
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T19:55:34.887+0000) > > > I cannot fathom in what society sending unsolicited dickpics does not constitute sexual assault or atleast sexual harassment. Someone going out in public and showing their dicks to people are arrested for sexual indecency. If they do it *specifically* with someone in mind, they're arrested for sexual assault. > i can dm you a dick pic that isn't my dick that is how sending a dick pic is not a sexual harassment nor nothing close to a crime
It's still sending a picture of a sexual organ without anyone's consent which is -you guessed it- harassment.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=0000000000000001000100010000000100000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T20:36:42.005+0000) > > I think the thing being ignored is the sources that have been provided to you that say that most forms of sexual harassment are civil cases, as well as the requests for you to provide a source for your claim otherwise. Because your sources being provided are discussing **monetary benefit**, which a criminal course *rarely* provides. And multiple people have admitted this isn't about the money but about the *behavior*, meaning the criminality of it is in question. If it isn't criminal, it's civil, and there's no reason a lawsuit is necessary. If it is criminal, the whole discussion is moot as arbitration doesn't apply to criminal acts.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00000000000000010001000100000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T20:50:49.954+0000) > > Because your sources being provided are discussing **monetary benefit**, which a criminal course *rarely* provides. It's almost like the sources are saying it's not a criminal matter. >And multiple people have admitted this isn't about the money but about the *behavior*, meaning the criminality of it is in question. Holy shit my guy, the _point_ of it being about the behavior is about the misdeeds being exposed in the public sphere, not to file criminal charges for something that _again_, is _not_ defined as a criminal case. The criminality can't be in question for something that isn't a criminal offense. Not _every_ shitty thing is a criminal offense. > If it isn't criminal, it's civil, and there's no reason a lawsuit is necessary. What the fuck does this even mean. Lawsuits _deal with_ civil cases. If this is you whining about them not arbitrating, see above. >If it is criminal, the whole discussion is moot as arbitration doesn't apply to criminal acts. _Exactly the fucking point._ It's _not_ a criminal case, hence why arbitration is being used.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00000000000000010001000100000001,timestamp=2019-05-08T20:29:54.633+0000) > > Because it's not just about the money. If a huge company loses a lawsuit it sends a waaay louder message, and peaks the publics interest more. It's pressuring Riot to actually change to avoid future lost lawsuits. They can't sue the company for actions of employees unless the company violated a contract they made with the employees. There's no basis for a suit against the company **for the culture claims** (ex: the farting/balltapping/etc). The only suit that could *possibly* be filed would be for pay discrimination. But again, that requires proof and is a criminal act thus the arbitration clause does not apply (arbitration is only mandated for civil claims). A company being found in violation of the law is even more "powerful" than a lawsuit, given that a criminal case proved wrongdoing while a civil lawsuit does not necessarily. So why haven't criminal charges been filed? Everyone keeps ignoring this question.
I think the thing being ignored is the sources that have been provided to you that say that most forms of sexual harassment are civil cases, as well as the requests for you to provide a source for your claim otherwise.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00000000000000010001000100000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T20:03:54.411+0000) > > still waiting on a source that criminal charges are a necessarily a thing > > and also because maybe, just maybe, solving this behind closed doors isn't going to accomplish jack nor shit If they don't want to solve it behind closed doors, why don't they report the behavior to the police and have a public criminal investigation take place?
Are you just going to ignore the first part of that post, or...?
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100010001,timestamp=2019-05-08T19:41:06.128+0000) > > Ehhh, not really. > > https://ottingerlaw.com/california/sexual-harassment-guide/ > * Hiring or reinstatement > * Back pay or promotion > * Changes in policies or practices of the employer > > So they absolutely can file a valid lawsuit against Riot for sexual assault and/or discrimination. Those lawsuits are generally thrown out as frivolous if a person did not prove a criminal act via a police investigation. Sometimes they can succeed without, but very rarely. But anyways, they could've gone to arbitration and gotten that monetary award, but they're refusing to do so. Why? Do they know they'll fail because it's a frivolous claim?
still waiting on a source that criminal charges are a necessarily a thing and also because maybe, just maybe, solving this behind closed doors isn't going to accomplish jack nor shit
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000000100010000,timestamp=2019-05-08T18:51:02.470+0000) > > [According to this,](https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/is-sexual-harassment-workplace-a-crime.htm) sexual harassment in the workplace _is_ a civil issue. This is in California, where **any** sexual harassment is a crime.
Mind coming up with a source?
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2019-05-08T15:51:51.918+0000) > > This *should* be taken up in a lawsuit, and it's an absolutely valid lawsuit. No, it's not. Lawsuits are for **civil issues**. Criminal charges are for **criminal issues such as sexual harassment**. Why have police reports or criminal charges not been filed?
[According to this,](https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/is-sexual-harassment-workplace-a-crime.htm) sexual harassment in the workplace _is_ a civil issue.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=0001000100000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T18:36:25.684+0000) > > So the actual statement from the article where a Rioter admits there's a sexism problem at Riot isn't evidence, the numerous other testimonials isn't evidence, the part where there is currently litigation involving cases isn't evidence, and the fact that a large group of employees are apparently convinced enough to stage a walkout isn't evidence. > > It's almost as though sexual harassment isn't a thing that's known to leave much in the way of physical evidence. Riot admitting things does not mean they're true. Riot is trying to save face. And that should be what pisses you off. Instead of investigations and process, Riot is taking a few claims and running with them. The walkout occurred because of this entitlement society nowadays where people think they're entitled to a world exactly how they want it, and anyone who doesn't agree needs to be fired/arrested/whatever. That sort of childish and selfish behavior is what should be punished. Not people who are not violating any laws. If they don't like the culture at Riot, they can file a complaint. If enough employees file a complaint, Riot will likely institute new policies. If more people disagree with the complaints, then Riot will not. You don't always get your way in life, and if more employees at Riot want a "bro culture" then they're allowed to have one. Don't like it? Don't work for Riot.
Riot admitting it... doesn't mean it's true. What. Ah yes, "entitlement society." I've never met someone who used that term that wasn't the most logical and rational minded person on the planet. People _are_ entitled to a world where they're not harassed. And what behavior should be punished in your eyes? People aren't allowed to talk about their experiences and organize to do anything about it? Whatever happened to hashtag free speech? And yeah, filing a complaint with the higher ups... that are enabling the crass culture at riot... that's a galaxy brain take if ever there was one.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Phant the Ghost,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2019-05-08T17:55:23.843+0000) > > WHYYYY would there be a walkout if there wasn't a genuine concern or harassment? MANY Emplyees are telling their employers that their environment is not just; why would that not warrant an investigation? If three people told me the same story, its worth looking into. You simply don't care because you're not a woman. I can tell you're not a woman because you simply don't care. (circular logic, but it's true) > > NO ONE signed up to be treated like shit. NO ONE. > Acting like crybabies by protesting? Acting like crybabies by talking about it? Acting like crybabies by demanding respect? > > And "acting like crybabies when they didn't get their way" ??? What is their way??? I dare you to tell me. Because last I checked, "their way" was "NOT GETTING FUCKEN HARASSED BY GROSS COWORKERS AT WORK" I don't understand what you don't understand. (By the way, you don't understand.) > > Are you dumb? You're telling me that if I'm facing constant disrespect doing the job I love, I'm not allowed to voice that? I'm being called a crybaby because I'm telling my employer that I'm being mistreated? So in other words, just deal with it? Are you r%%%%%ed? Do you ever think that disrespect is NOT what we sign up for when we work for Riot> There is no harassment! Harassment is a crime! If there was **any** evidence of actual harassment, the police would be involved and by now arrests would've been made! These people are complaining they don't like the "culture", and they're complaining they want people fired just because they don't like them. If they don't like their contract or coworkers they can find another job.
So the actual statement from the article where a Rioter admits there's a sexism problem at Riot isn't evidence, the numerous other testimonials isn't evidence, the part where there is currently litigation involving cases isn't evidence, and the fact that a large group of employees are apparently convinced enough to stage a walkout isn't evidence. It's almost as though sexual harassment isn't a thing that's known to leave much in the way of physical evidence.
GenoXx (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=000400000001000000000000000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-05-02T21:15:31.405+0000) > > Calling a post with an unintelligible run-on sentence a word salad is insulting? News to me. It was completely unnecessary. Furthermore, you didn't even have a counter argument for it. You're practically antagonizing everyone in this comment section who isn't in favors of sjws, the term you act like doesnt exist.
I'm not sure how to have a counterargument for something I can't even parse the meaning of chief I'm also not acting like the term doesn't exist, I'm saying that the term is used for things that do not exist And also wondering why so many people are bringing it up in a thread that has nothing to do with it.
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=00130002000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T21:24:55.685+0000) > > Eh, can't comment on that, but Shapiro is definitely a sexist, racist, homo/transphobe, etc. This is when I realized "*you're one of them*" > Give me a break. The law he criticized prohibited discrimination, no different from laws prohibiting such against women and minorities. But because its so vague, it can be *weaponized*. > What march would this be? Have you never heard of Berkeley? Portland? Antifa in general? > Sargon? He's _repeatedly_ espoused racist and sexist beliefs. Stop pretending he's a victim in the slightest. Would you like to provide evidence of that claim *WITH* context included? > Pretty much everyone agrees Daily Mail's a tabloid rag, AFAIK. ok. Does that change the fact that they did indeed try to smear him?
> [{quoted}](name=Beacon Academy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=001300020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T21:36:04.808+0000) > > This is when I realized "*you're one of them*" Booga booga! > But because its so vague, it can be *weaponized*. lmao feel free to post again when it actually is Also you speak as though any decent person would actually be affected. It's really not that hard to not discriminate. > Have you never heard of Berkeley? Portland? Antifa in general? I suppose I must have stuttered over text somehow. What were those "free speech marchers" marching for? > Would you like to provide evidence of that claim *WITH* context included? There's so much I wouldn't know where to start, to be honest. Should we start with the rape jokes? Or his numerous uses of the n word? Or his general dismission of feminism? > ok. Does that change the fact that they did indeed try to smear him? Eh. Tabloids smear everybody, and to be perfectly honest I have better things to do than look into this specific case on my own. The whole ess jay doubleyoo thing is off topic anyway; none of these people have anything to do with Riot's abuses towards its employees.
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=001300020000,timestamp=2019-05-02T19:45:15.566+0000) > > it's almost as though.... most of the time people disagreeing with so-called ess jay doubleyoos ARE those things.... They've called Ben Shapiro an anti-semite despite him being jewish They call Jordan Peterson a transphobe simply because he doesn't want the government to enforce what "pronoun" he *has* to call people, lest he be put in jail or fined for "hate speech" Antifa have gone around dealing out verbal/physical abuse while calling free speech marchers "nazis" They've even smeared Carl Benjamin as a racist, a sexist, an Islamophobe, etc. just because he is running for a political office based on his views that the rights of an individual should not be infringed upon by the values of a group and isn't afraid to call the media out for being "smear merchants" Daily Mail even went as far as to take a speech he did previously, take four of his quotes, cut them up, and stitch them back into one quote just to make him look like he condones %%%%philia AFTER he had just called them "smear merchants." Not to mention nearly every debate or interview he has attended since then has started out with a "So... Why are you a racist/sexist?" and continue on those lines of questioning while never talking about policies just so they can attempt to cut up the interviews to make him look as bad as possible. Kudos to him for having infinite patience though.
> [{quoted}](name=Beacon Academy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0013000200000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T21:13:04.751+0000) > > They've called Ben Shapiro an anti-semite despite him being jewish Eh, can't comment on that, but Shapiro is definitely a sexist, racist, homo/transphobe, etc. > They call Jordan Peterson a transphobe simply because he doesn't want the government to enforce what "pronoun" he *has* to call people, lest he be put in jail or fined for "hate speech" Give me a break. The law he criticized prohibited discrimination, no different from laws prohibiting such against women and minorities. > Antifa have gone around dealing out verbal/physical abuse while calling free speech marchers "nazis" What march would this be? > They've even smeared Carl Benjamin as a racist, a sexist, an Islamophobe, etc. just because he is running for a political office based on his views that the rights of an individual should not be infringed upon by the values of a group and isn't afraid to call the media out for being "smear merchants" Sargon? He's _repeatedly_ espoused racist and sexist beliefs. Stop pretending he's a victim in the slightest. > Daily Mail even went as far as to take a speech he did previously, take four of his quotes, cut them up, and stitch them back into one quote just to make him look like he condones %%%%philia AFTER he had just called them "smear merchants." Pretty much everyone agrees Daily Mail's a tabloid rag, AFAIK.
GenoXx (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0004000000010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T19:34:22.481+0000) > > Did you toss that word salad enough? And at this point, It's clear you lost the debate. Resorting to insulting.
Calling a post with an unintelligible run-on sentence a word salad is insulting? News to me.
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Beacon Academy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=00130002,timestamp=2019-05-02T19:28:35.260+0000) > > If you do not agree with an SJW, you are: > > A bigot > A racist > A sexist > A rapist > A homophobe > A transphobe > A Nazi > An antisemite > An islamaphobe it's almost as though.... most of the time people disagreeing with so-called ess jay doubleyoos ARE those things....
Ceazaru (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=00040000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T19:16:25.839+0000) > > Not sure how a hispanic trans woman can pull that card lmao Well great for you but honestly i could care less i won't take part in identity oppression pyramid scheme. Your identity doesn't allow to be an uncivilized extremist who resorts to violence when politically challenge anyone who supports political violence should have their voting rights revoked since they can't allow people to take part in political activities.
Did you toss that word salad enough?
Ceazaru (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=000400000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T18:15:55.071+0000) > > It really does matter, though, when those views are "I think [insert minority here] shouldn't exist." > > We didn't beat the Nazis the first time by calmly debating them, after all. Funny that you pull the “protect defenseless minority/white savior” card while you’re speaking to one.How does it feel to know that a young black man disagrees with violence against his political opposition and just know you’re different. Saying things is not the same as actions.
Not sure how a hispanic trans woman can pull that card lmao
Ceazaru (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0004000000010000,timestamp=2019-05-02T17:23:40.623+0000) > > Love how you fail to mention just what the politics are that they're "disagreeing" with, and why it's a just cause to shut them down. Doesn’t matter what the views are. I wouldn’t go out and assault people marching with flags of Mao Zedong or Joseph Stalin. Good to know that you support political violence though. You probably think Antifa are good people while they go out and beat people for filming them. Anti fascist hah about as anti fascist as the democratic people’s republic of North Korea is democratic.
It really does matter, though, when those views are "I think [insert minority here] shouldn't exist." We didn't beat the Nazis the first time by calmly debating them, after all.
Ceazaru (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-05-01T23:19:23.328+0000) > > Ah yes, the ess jay doubleyoos are well known for horrifically executing innocent people and commiting all other kinds of crimes against humanity. They are known for physically assaulting people and shutting down gatherings because of political disagreements. You’re siding with and defending violent authoritarians that hide behind “tolerance” to keep themselves from criticism.
Love how you fail to mention just what the politics are that they're "disagreeing" with, and why it's a just cause to shut them down.
: > [{quoted}](name=hhaavviikk,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0013,timestamp=2019-05-02T06:31:24.536+0000) > > I have no clue what SJW is so I googled it and it says : > > Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism, as well as identity politics.''' > > I eh, don't quite see the harm in this, surely being against wage discrimination and discrimination based on sex is part of both feminism and civil rights You might want to actually learn and educate yourself. SJW is a bad term, and if you do some digging you can find out for yourself. Not only are there vastly different points of view. As far as all this SJW goes you need to remember the most important thing. They are trying to control you. They will police language, police how you think, and do many things like Dox people, attack their careers, and more just for sharing a differing opinion. Additionally Feminism in 1st world countries is all but obsolete. The term Egalitarian is their weakness, their Kryptonite. That term means... e·gal·i·tar·i·an /iˌɡaləˈterēən/ adjective 1. relating to or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities. -------------------------------------------------- What feminism (and many of the SJW) want is empowerment of women, at any cost. Instead of raising everyone's ship (being good to all) they seek to have women better than men through raising of women, and the lowering of men. That isn't cool. Sure Feminism is needed in other countries, like those in Muslim countries where women are beaten and raped, feminism is highly needed (though again Egalitarian is just a better term and practice all together, but these countries can't be picky) Wage discrimination has been proving false on many occasions, factors such as what job they want and what they are willing to provide said jobs factor in majorly. If women were paid less for the same job all the capitalist companies would simply higher women and not hire men, they want money more than they hate women. BUT as I said think for yourself. Do some research, watch some youtube videos with several different view points. ShoeonHead, Amazing Atheist, ArmouredSkeptic, ChrisRayGun, RagingGoldenEagle, and more all have some great videos. Some of them lean left, some of them lean right, but for the most part each uses their head and while they each have their own likes/desires/leanings, they all use common sense for the most part. Of course because I am discussing things civilly this post will likely get banned for hate speech. (for telling others to think and research, lol)
Oh hey, another person a) propping up SJWs as things that actually exist, b) pretending feminism isn't the same damn thing as egalitarianism, c) thinking that SJWs are all-powerful thought police (lmao), and d) thinking that wage discrimination doesn't exist. Newsflash: people don't get attacked by "duh ess jay doubleyoos" for having "different opinions." They come under fire for having views utterly contrary to the wellbeing of humanity. Being a neo-nazi or a klansman, or sympathizing with such, isn't a "different opinion", it's promoting violence and hatred against innocent people. (also, Amazing Atheist? Really? I'm not familiar with the others but that guy's not good.)
: Yorick and Mordekaiser
Yorick's one of my favorite characters, but I don't think he could win in a head on fight against Morde by himself (+ the ghoulsquad). Morde's control over souls, at least as far as current lore is concerned, is wholly independent of the Black Mist. I don't think he'd have much of an issue with turning Yorick's own army against him.
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0004000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T00:29:29.338+0000) > > Because punching Nazis, a political group that _by definition_ wish to eradicate large swaths of innocent people, is totally the same thing as horrifically executing innocents. Sure. And everyone that's left of Karl Marx is a "Nazi" to these people. *People that disagree with me are Nazi's. *All people are equal Pick one.
Hmm.... y'know, I keep seeing people who think SJWs are a real thing and not some made up boogeyman made to demonize activists make this claim, but I've never actually seen anyone inflict bodily harm on, much less kill (which I will again note is not something one can claim Antifa activists have done, unlike the alt-right and similar ilk, including the two groups you compare "SJW"s to) someone whose ideology isn't utterly repugnant to anyone with a sense of morals.
: > [{quoted}](name=Cetri,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-05-01T23:19:23.328+0000) > > Ah yes, the ess jay doubleyoos are well known for horrifically executing innocent people and commiting all other kinds of crimes against humanity. They would if they physically could. Why do you think "punching Nazi's" or assaulting people with bike locks or stock piling knives and sawed off shotguns in the case of Antifa is considered acceptable? The mindset and desire to do harm to people they don't like is the same. You're being completely disingenuous.
Because punching Nazis, a political group that _by definition_ wish to eradicate large swaths of innocent people, is totally the same thing as horrifically executing innocents. Sure.
: I mean no disrespect here to anyone, but my thought is this; Pandering to SJW's even a little bit is like opening Pandora's Box. You cave one time and it's over for your company/business because they will demonize you with mob justice and call you the worst things imaginable to shut you up and keep you from defending yourself or even explaining yourself. Bear in mind, I'm talking about the #hashtag activists, the people that make EVERYTHING about gender, race, or sexual orientation, and force their way into all sorts of cultures just so they can gut them and replace the people with other SJW's to make more echo chambers, and use those positions to silence anyone who has differing views from theirs. "Straight white male right wingers" do it too, I'm not disputing that for one second. [removed by moderation] Worst of all, they make allegations and accusations based on hear say and feelings without respect for things like due process and rights of the accused all while ignoring the slippery slope they are on because all that mob justice they dish out on others can be used against them in turn. It's anarchy, accelerationist, and it's just plain not progressive in any sense of the word. Riot could be innocent and being targeting so these people can gain something, Riot might be guilty full stop. That's up to the justice system to decide, and it's why it exists. SJW's think they can circumvent the systems of checks and balances that protect EVERYONE'S individual rights from actual tyranny, including people like themselves. You can make accusations, you can call out bad behavior, you can fight for justice, but you better fucking have some evidence or damn good probably cause to do so. You better respect EVERYONE'S rights, even the accused, or you're no fucking better! SJW mob justice and #hashtag activism also hurts the actual victims because now their word is seen as just as cooky as the extremists. TL;DR: SJW's don't allow due process and it shits it up for everyone in the long run. I completely understand wanting to make the world a better place, but they refuse to acknowledge their own bias and hypocrisy in their use of mob justice over actual justice.
>SJW's though, are extremists. They never improve the thing they are trying to change. They just pervert it to serve themselves. The difference between them and groups like the KKK or ISIS are simply in the demographics they like/hate. The tactics are the same. Ah yes, the ess jay doubleyoos are well known for horrifically executing innocent people and commiting all other kinds of crimes against humanity.
Bazerka (NA)
: Question: How do you view Riot?
How do I view Riot? Lore team is pretty alright, though I wish they had more creative freedom (I'm still sore over what could have been with Taliyah). But y'all really need to get your shit together RE: how your employees are treated.
Banuvan (NA)
: Not enough options there. Those are only positive. You left out any negative options. How biased are you?
Elon Musk being a positive comparison is kind of a YMMV thing, but yeah.
: Players behind Riot employee walkout
Ah, of course there's people here complaining "but the ess jay doubleyoos!!!1!" as if those actually exist or have anything to do with the case.
: Completely disconnected from the majority of the world that lives outside of the social justice bubble.
implying social justice is a bad thing and also implying that riot really cares, which given that they're still apparently having workplace discrimination problems, seems to suggest otherwise.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Pandemic Punch,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=T2YlikvU,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-30T00:51:46.492+0000) > > This is what happens when you give into the SJW culture. They will always want more and will always find something new to be outraged about. Instead of staying neutral or standing against it, they have now reached the point where they are the snake eating it's own tail. > > There is no winning when you try to cater to the people who arent grateful for anything. It starts with demands to not say a word and keeps snowballing. At some point ya got to say "I am not sorry" The argument over arbitration has literally **nothing** to do with the "SJW culture" you're trying to use to insult people.
I feel like it's a very good rule of thumb to never humor anyone who unironically calls people SJWs.
: You stop policing others speech and you won't get downvoted. Nobody gets hurt from these words.
Obviously, some people do, or this wouldn't be a conversation. Why are you so concerned with being able to insult people over disabilities in a video game?
: Way too many of you are making light of disabilities to insult people who make errors.BLANKing STOP.
Wow, this thread is a trash fire. Imagine being someone who thinks it's the victim's fault for getting upset when someone is antagonizing them, rather than the problem being someone deciding to be a dick for no reason. Like, sure, there's a mute button. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. That does nothing to give the antagonizing player the necesarry feedback that being a dick is something that should not be tolerated.
: you really like the word eldritch hu?
>They were strange amalgamations of bears and other creatures, things of legends, dreams, and folklore. They had all been men once too, but now, so consumed by the true spirit, they had passed beyond what the normal animals looked like. The largest of them, a huge bear-like thing, lumbered out of the forest—where its head should have been, a decayed elk’s skull rested on a mane of black feathers. Eyes glowing with blue fire, it opened its jaws to reveal a child’s face inside its maw. Then the child opened its own mouth too, spewing a foul brown liquid. Other nightmares followed it from the woods, limping, crawling, and shambling forward. It's a pretty succinct description of this sort of thing.
: I mean if you read the story I really don't see how you can see that happening. He literally disfigures anyone that follows him into a grotesque monster that can only think about killing
Becoming an eldritch furry doesn't sound that bad imho
: >Orianna was once a girl, but died practicing turret diving. This is no longer canon. Orianna didn't die, she replaced her body with Hextech over time, because her body stopped working after being poisoned in Zaun. She helped the people down there during a great tragedy (explosion). _____________ >Caitlyn isn't 18. She's younger. This, according to current canon lore, is also impossible to be true. Her bio states that she got her Hextech rifle as a gift from her parents for her 21th birthday, therefore she **has** to be at least 21.
Also, Sion's crown is Jarven the _First's_, Voli is just said to have created the first river (not during his fight with Ornn), and it didn't take all of Runeterra (and probably not even all of Valoran) to take down Morde. Unless that changes in a month or two, of course, but I doubt it. TF getting his powers from an experiment is old lore as well, I believe, as is the bit about Maokai.
: Kinda doubt that Ledros has anything to do with a new champion. The 2 new champions we currently know which probably were in development when MaliciousMetal visited should be the new support and probably the assassin which they hinted that they have one in the works. Ledros clearly is not a whimsical support, nor does he have any relation to the teaser which has shown a book. And his appearance definitely does not read "assassin" either. He is described with alot of armor, being a titanic dude, using sword and shield. This description would most likely fit to either a tank or a juggernaut, but definitely not an assassin. _________________ It would change quite alot of Mordekaisers lore, you are right about that. So can be that Malicious is just trolling us here, since Ledros design resembles Mordekaiser so much. About weapons: depends how you see it. I would consider Urgot as a "total change of weapons".
Yeah, he's definitely not the supp, though I had already forgotten that the next new champ was supposed to be an assassin, so you're probably right there. Urgot... is kinda on the fence. On the one hand yeah he has a machine gun instead of a chemtech whatsit, but it's also still a gun for an arm. Not a total departure like going from a mace to sword-and-shield would be.
Show more

Cetri

Level 44 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion