Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

imtheparty    

Rank #661 on Content
imtheparty Avatar Level 129 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Offline
Send mail to imtheparty Block imtheparty Invite imtheparty to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 19
Date Signed Up:4/11/2013
Last Login:11/11/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#661
Comment Ranking:#5935
Highest Content Rank:#586
Highest Comment Rank:#5732
Content Thumbs: 3963 total,  4328 ,  365
Comment Thumbs: 376 total,  404 ,  28
Content Level Progress: 18% (18/100)
Level 129 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 130 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/10)
Level 127 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 128 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Subscribers:1
Content Views:180936
Times Content Favorited:396 times
Total Comments Made:68
FJ Points:3188
Favorite Tags: Fetish (2) | lol (2) | the (2)

latest user's comments

#74 - Here's something you should really think long and hard about. …  [+] (3 new replies) 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful +1
User avatar #78 - raynagrimm (09/19/2014) [-]
just pointing out the problems, your the one who decided to reply to me. like i said not mad, just bored with no sleep and way to much time on my hands with out any cocks to stroke instead
User avatar #79 - imtheparty (09/19/2014) [-]
Well when I wrote this story, the main point was that the way relationships are nowadays is absolute bullshit and if something doesn't change, men will find a way to phase out women.
User avatar #82 - raynagrimm (09/19/2014) [-]
yeah, finding a good match is near impossible. and even if you think you do find a good one, you wont know that they were a good match till death do you part (no marriage needed, just the fact that you spent the rest of your lifetime putting up with each others shit)

may you at least find a worthy fuck buddy one day
#42 - This was one of the factors that led to me writing t…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful +4
#68 - anotheroneonearth (09/19/2014) [-]
I'm not even surprised that this already exists
#41 - Any way you want.  [+] (1 new reply) 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful +1
#43 - miia (09/19/2014) [-]
any way I want?
#38 - What are you talking about suffering? You'd enter the service …  [+] (5 new replies) 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful 0
#46 - raynagrimm (09/19/2014) [-]
well i understand the appeal of it, if i was still single this would be my fantasy come true. im not mad, but lets point out some of the problems

we are dealing with humans, there will always be that one fucker that want to ruin it for everyone, even in times of peace

there are just so many ways this could go wrong. like you forgot about the religious zealots that will probably try to fight it and cause more trouble, there will be much blood spilled over trying to get the right for this to get massed produced

also your sex dolls will be so fucking expensive, good luck getting one if you dont have the money for it. fuck i have tons of book marks of sex toys i want but don have the money for just yet.

but as long as i get to stay with my boyfriend i'd be okay with this version world peace, id rather be his cum dump, just keep a leash on me so no one else will touch me when we go out.

and as much fun as being a sex slave would be in my fantasy world, people can't keep going forever, id like to be able to do other things, and not be thrown in a cage till the next time he is ready. is that how it would be? will there be women kept in cages every where till they get to old to be any use of the guy they are with?

in a world with out a need for women you didnt really describe how safe real females would be. if you cant tell machine from a real women whats to stop a sick sadistic fuck from going around and hurting the real ones cause that's his fetish? all you got to do is fine the one's that bleed and he has found the next one that he can torture to death.
or will there be laws against that? seeing as women have become slaves we cant really protect ourselves anymore. we seem to lost all rights when we became a dying gender

you might not be the kind of guy who would do the things said above, but you also didnt think that it would happen. world peace wont stop someone from killing if thats what gets them off in a world were you go out to seek out your desires.
#74 - imtheparty (09/19/2014) [-]
Here's something you should really think long and hard about. It's satire.
User avatar #78 - raynagrimm (09/19/2014) [-]
just pointing out the problems, your the one who decided to reply to me. like i said not mad, just bored with no sleep and way to much time on my hands with out any cocks to stroke instead
User avatar #79 - imtheparty (09/19/2014) [-]
Well when I wrote this story, the main point was that the way relationships are nowadays is absolute bullshit and if something doesn't change, men will find a way to phase out women.
User avatar #82 - raynagrimm (09/19/2014) [-]
yeah, finding a good match is near impossible. and even if you think you do find a good one, you wont know that they were a good match till death do you part (no marriage needed, just the fact that you spent the rest of your lifetime putting up with each others shit)

may you at least find a worthy fuck buddy one day
#23 - When I wrote this, my driving thought was "How could the …  [+] (1 new reply) 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful 0
User avatar #34 - antiponiesuser (09/19/2014) [-]
you are accurately correct. women are shit, in my opinion.

man, I just told a girl who is nuts for me the other day ''hey, would you lick to suck my dick'' (in an elaborate and funny way of course,because the situation had the joke avaible, but I dont want to translate from spanish) , and she started taking it all seriously, and asking me to tell her what I meant with that.

So I told her, who of us two takes every sexual joke seriously? who has photos of both of us all over her phone? who is constantly messaging the otehr? and she went mad and told me she hated me.

man women are stupid. also I dont dig the chick if you have any doubts.
#22 - "Flawless AI" means that you can't tell the differen… 09/19/2014 on The Future is Beautiful +11
#373 - Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrow… 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
#141 - I get that. I've seen the episode. Just pointing out more doub…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/10/2014 on The future of america,... 0
User avatar #144 - skysailor (09/10/2014) [-]
Yeah there's definitely a double standard. No argument there.
#367 - And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argume… 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
#212 - At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would a…  [+] (3 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
#211 - >meme arrows Oh well would you look at that. Cherr… 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
#19 - Picture 09/10/2014 on mfw I'm confident I can... +43
#193 - I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any… 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
#192 - Once again, you're still wrong and full of ******** …  [+] (6 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#164 - I told you that what you've said is ******** and …  [+] (9 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#61 - Because it's about emphasis, not spelling.  [+] (1 new reply) 09/10/2014 on English, do you speak it +2
#64 - fncben (09/10/2014) [-]
Thank you...
#138 - No. You're not correct and even furthermore, you're still not …  [+] (11 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #155 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'd think that if my argument is so fallacious, that it would be very easy for you to present a counter argument refuting everything I say. But instead, you withdraw completely from this conversation.

I am not a doctor, and have no medical license, but it seems more like you're suffering from a case of the sour grapes. See, that's funny because it's a fable about a pissy fox. You're the pissy fox in this scenario. I don't know what I am; the tree? My role is no the basis of the humor value of this statement.
User avatar #164 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I told you that what you've said is bullshit and that I don't feel like wasting my time refuting you. You won't listen anyways. No one is changing anyone's minds. You want to see flopping penises in video games and that's not what's sexually attractive. I'm a bisexual male and I know that that's not going to sell a fucking game. Everything I've read from your arguments is all ignorant and bullshit so I'm done. You should consider rethinking your views on how to market. You should also learn that only an idiot would say you're wrong just because your argument is writhing with fallacies. Fallacies aren't a standard of right or wrong and not everything is fucking black and white. One final thing, when someone who refutes you backs out of continuation because of how flabbergasted they are at your sheer stupidity, you shouldn't consider that a victory.
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#128 - You could probably find it somewhere. There's no point in argu…  [+] (13 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #136 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
And now I'll proceed in ad hominem: did you just google "logical falicies" and decide to just pick a few and throw them around? You sound like a child who just learned a new word and wants to use it at any opportunity, but doesn't quite understand its usage.

And even if my argument was weak, you would be committing argumentum ad logicam. Pointing out any weakness in my argument doesn't automatically render your argument correct. If I said "the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean," that doesn't prove that the sky is red.
User avatar #138 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
No. You're not correct and even furthermore, you're still not correct. What you're looking for is argument from fallacy, which I still didn't do. I never said I was right just because everything you say is utter bullshit. What I've stated is that everything you say is utter bullshit and I refuse to continue with someone who only says bullshit.
User avatar #155 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'd think that if my argument is so fallacious, that it would be very easy for you to present a counter argument refuting everything I say. But instead, you withdraw completely from this conversation.

I am not a doctor, and have no medical license, but it seems more like you're suffering from a case of the sour grapes. See, that's funny because it's a fable about a pissy fox. You're the pissy fox in this scenario. I don't know what I am; the tree? My role is no the basis of the humor value of this statement.
User avatar #164 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I told you that what you've said is bullshit and that I don't feel like wasting my time refuting you. You won't listen anyways. No one is changing anyone's minds. You want to see flopping penises in video games and that's not what's sexually attractive. I'm a bisexual male and I know that that's not going to sell a fucking game. Everything I've read from your arguments is all ignorant and bullshit so I'm done. You should consider rethinking your views on how to market. You should also learn that only an idiot would say you're wrong just because your argument is writhing with fallacies. Fallacies aren't a standard of right or wrong and not everything is fucking black and white. One final thing, when someone who refutes you backs out of continuation because of how flabbergasted they are at your sheer stupidity, you shouldn't consider that a victory.
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#117 - I've read into it a bit more. Specifically the part where you …  [+] (24 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters 0
User avatar #123 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm sure an equal percentage of the male demographic is homosexual as the female demographic, so that renders that variance moot. (in fact, most estimates say that more men are gay than females are lesbian. The numbers vary, but a quick google shows that gay men are more common than lesbians.)

And yes, there are attractive men in videogames, and attractive females in videogames, but attractive isn't the same as sexual - especially in cases where the sexuality is very obviously the intent. What is the male equivalent of the DOA Beach Volleyball franchise?
#152 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to portray volleyball, seriously that's it, it's how they dress when they play in real life, in swimsuits, it makes sense with the sand and such...
User avatar #159 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
Have you played any of those games? Volleyball is a very small part of it. And they specifically wrote into the engine a script to have the boobs jiggle independently. And the realism of the attire was not the intent, they were intended to be sexy, and so they were. Some of the outfits would put Borat's green stripe to shame.
#167 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
so you are A) saying borat is sexy, B) saying that they are sexy, not sexist, as you have clearly previously stated are two separate things, and C) saying that you have done enough research about this to warrant the fact that they have a separate engine for boobs, which i think is great, cause boobs are awesome, and boobs awesome enough to need their own system are the awesomerest...

also i have never played it, i'm not fond of sports games.
User avatar #173 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
A. Of course Borat is sexy, potassium does the body well

B. I think that's very important - yes they are sexy and not sexist, those are two separate things. The lack of sexy males in games is a bit sexist, but that doesn't automatically make all the sexy females in games sexist. To put it in an easier to understand way, it's unfair to craig to get a dollar and john not to get a dollar, but that doesn't make craig unfair.

C. I'm not a programmer, but I think I remember hearing something about all the work that went into the boob physics. A lot.
#174 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to be fair how physics affect the human body fundamental differs from how it affects a hanging piece of flab, we have muscles that expand and contract to help us stay balanced and shit, and boobs really just flop around, so using a different engine for a different type of physics kinda makes sense to me

i've also never seen borat

how many male volleyball players do you see professionally? it's just like saying how many female professional football players do you see...
User avatar #179 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
It doesn't have to be volleyball, I just meant the overt sexuality
#180 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
but if we can apply things to one game, we can generalize, that's what bigots love to do, so why can't us logical people do it too...
User avatar #185 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
That comment doesn't make sense to me, so I'll take this as a time to sign off. I'll reply to like 1 more thing, then go to bed.

Hopefully this doesn't turn into a shitstorm of other people reading things and choosing sides based on vague perceived ideals, and replying with stuff that has already been said, or god forbid someone's an expert and proves me wrong in a humiliating way. I just want nobody to notice this. That would be nice. The 0 thumbs throughout this is awesome. I like 0.
#190 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
don't know what to say really, goodnight to you then
User avatar #128 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
You could probably find it somewhere. There's no point in arguing this further because you use ad ignorantiam and confirmation bias. You also have circular reasoning and false equivocation. You're also full of bullshit.
User avatar #136 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
And now I'll proceed in ad hominem: did you just google "logical falicies" and decide to just pick a few and throw them around? You sound like a child who just learned a new word and wants to use it at any opportunity, but doesn't quite understand its usage.

And even if my argument was weak, you would be committing argumentum ad logicam. Pointing out any weakness in my argument doesn't automatically render your argument correct. If I said "the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean," that doesn't prove that the sky is red.
User avatar #138 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
No. You're not correct and even furthermore, you're still not correct. What you're looking for is argument from fallacy, which I still didn't do. I never said I was right just because everything you say is utter bullshit. What I've stated is that everything you say is utter bullshit and I refuse to continue with someone who only says bullshit.
User avatar #155 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'd think that if my argument is so fallacious, that it would be very easy for you to present a counter argument refuting everything I say. But instead, you withdraw completely from this conversation.

I am not a doctor, and have no medical license, but it seems more like you're suffering from a case of the sour grapes. See, that's funny because it's a fable about a pissy fox. You're the pissy fox in this scenario. I don't know what I am; the tree? My role is no the basis of the humor value of this statement.
User avatar #164 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I told you that what you've said is bullshit and that I don't feel like wasting my time refuting you. You won't listen anyways. No one is changing anyone's minds. You want to see flopping penises in video games and that's not what's sexually attractive. I'm a bisexual male and I know that that's not going to sell a fucking game. Everything I've read from your arguments is all ignorant and bullshit so I'm done. You should consider rethinking your views on how to market. You should also learn that only an idiot would say you're wrong just because your argument is writhing with fallacies. Fallacies aren't a standard of right or wrong and not everything is fucking black and white. One final thing, when someone who refutes you backs out of continuation because of how flabbergasted they are at your sheer stupidity, you shouldn't consider that a victory.
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#111 - So you're demonizing common sense marketing tactics?  [+] (26 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters +1
User avatar #113 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
If you scroll sown until you see the purple link in a message of mine, you'll see that your very vague description of 'common sense marketing tactics' is questionable at best. Worth debate? Sure. But definitely without proper consideration.
User avatar #117 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I've read into it a bit more. Specifically the part where you source gamer demographic statistics. At that point, you've become heterosexist. You assume that all female gamers are heterosexual and that thusly, attractive females won't sell as well. Your other gigantic failing point is that men are just as "sexualized" in video games are made expendable. There are plenty of attractive men. Attractive people are more pleasing to look at. Double standards just won't allow people to see that it goes both ways and has been that way for a long time. Diversity is nice, but what's even better is being able to differentiate between fact and fiction.
User avatar #123 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm sure an equal percentage of the male demographic is homosexual as the female demographic, so that renders that variance moot. (in fact, most estimates say that more men are gay than females are lesbian. The numbers vary, but a quick google shows that gay men are more common than lesbians.)

And yes, there are attractive men in videogames, and attractive females in videogames, but attractive isn't the same as sexual - especially in cases where the sexuality is very obviously the intent. What is the male equivalent of the DOA Beach Volleyball franchise?
#152 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to portray volleyball, seriously that's it, it's how they dress when they play in real life, in swimsuits, it makes sense with the sand and such...
User avatar #159 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
Have you played any of those games? Volleyball is a very small part of it. And they specifically wrote into the engine a script to have the boobs jiggle independently. And the realism of the attire was not the intent, they were intended to be sexy, and so they were. Some of the outfits would put Borat's green stripe to shame.
#167 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
so you are A) saying borat is sexy, B) saying that they are sexy, not sexist, as you have clearly previously stated are two separate things, and C) saying that you have done enough research about this to warrant the fact that they have a separate engine for boobs, which i think is great, cause boobs are awesome, and boobs awesome enough to need their own system are the awesomerest...

also i have never played it, i'm not fond of sports games.
User avatar #173 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
A. Of course Borat is sexy, potassium does the body well

B. I think that's very important - yes they are sexy and not sexist, those are two separate things. The lack of sexy males in games is a bit sexist, but that doesn't automatically make all the sexy females in games sexist. To put it in an easier to understand way, it's unfair to craig to get a dollar and john not to get a dollar, but that doesn't make craig unfair.

C. I'm not a programmer, but I think I remember hearing something about all the work that went into the boob physics. A lot.
#174 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to be fair how physics affect the human body fundamental differs from how it affects a hanging piece of flab, we have muscles that expand and contract to help us stay balanced and shit, and boobs really just flop around, so using a different engine for a different type of physics kinda makes sense to me

i've also never seen borat

how many male volleyball players do you see professionally? it's just like saying how many female professional football players do you see...
User avatar #179 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
It doesn't have to be volleyball, I just meant the overt sexuality
#180 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
but if we can apply things to one game, we can generalize, that's what bigots love to do, so why can't us logical people do it too...
User avatar #185 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
That comment doesn't make sense to me, so I'll take this as a time to sign off. I'll reply to like 1 more thing, then go to bed.

Hopefully this doesn't turn into a shitstorm of other people reading things and choosing sides based on vague perceived ideals, and replying with stuff that has already been said, or god forbid someone's an expert and proves me wrong in a humiliating way. I just want nobody to notice this. That would be nice. The 0 thumbs throughout this is awesome. I like 0.
#190 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
don't know what to say really, goodnight to you then
User avatar #128 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
You could probably find it somewhere. There's no point in arguing this further because you use ad ignorantiam and confirmation bias. You also have circular reasoning and false equivocation. You're also full of bullshit.
User avatar #136 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
And now I'll proceed in ad hominem: did you just google "logical falicies" and decide to just pick a few and throw them around? You sound like a child who just learned a new word and wants to use it at any opportunity, but doesn't quite understand its usage.

And even if my argument was weak, you would be committing argumentum ad logicam. Pointing out any weakness in my argument doesn't automatically render your argument correct. If I said "the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean," that doesn't prove that the sky is red.
User avatar #138 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
No. You're not correct and even furthermore, you're still not correct. What you're looking for is argument from fallacy, which I still didn't do. I never said I was right just because everything you say is utter bullshit. What I've stated is that everything you say is utter bullshit and I refuse to continue with someone who only says bullshit.
User avatar #155 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'd think that if my argument is so fallacious, that it would be very easy for you to present a counter argument refuting everything I say. But instead, you withdraw completely from this conversation.

I am not a doctor, and have no medical license, but it seems more like you're suffering from a case of the sour grapes. See, that's funny because it's a fable about a pissy fox. You're the pissy fox in this scenario. I don't know what I am; the tree? My role is no the basis of the humor value of this statement.
User avatar #164 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I told you that what you've said is bullshit and that I don't feel like wasting my time refuting you. You won't listen anyways. No one is changing anyone's minds. You want to see flopping penises in video games and that's not what's sexually attractive. I'm a bisexual male and I know that that's not going to sell a fucking game. Everything I've read from your arguments is all ignorant and bullshit so I'm done. You should consider rethinking your views on how to market. You should also learn that only an idiot would say you're wrong just because your argument is writhing with fallacies. Fallacies aren't a standard of right or wrong and not everything is fucking black and white. One final thing, when someone who refutes you backs out of continuation because of how flabbergasted they are at your sheer stupidity, you shouldn't consider that a victory.
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#99 - Sexualization occurs in the mind. You're the one who objectifi…  [+] (28 new replies) 09/10/2014 on Strong Female Characters +3
User avatar #108 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm not degrading sex, if you would read more than the first statement that spurned many conversations (each with few repeated points). Sexualization is great, but it's not equal.
User avatar #111 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
So you're demonizing common sense marketing tactics?
User avatar #113 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
If you scroll sown until you see the purple link in a message of mine, you'll see that your very vague description of 'common sense marketing tactics' is questionable at best. Worth debate? Sure. But definitely without proper consideration.
User avatar #117 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I've read into it a bit more. Specifically the part where you source gamer demographic statistics. At that point, you've become heterosexist. You assume that all female gamers are heterosexual and that thusly, attractive females won't sell as well. Your other gigantic failing point is that men are just as "sexualized" in video games are made expendable. There are plenty of attractive men. Attractive people are more pleasing to look at. Double standards just won't allow people to see that it goes both ways and has been that way for a long time. Diversity is nice, but what's even better is being able to differentiate between fact and fiction.
User avatar #123 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm sure an equal percentage of the male demographic is homosexual as the female demographic, so that renders that variance moot. (in fact, most estimates say that more men are gay than females are lesbian. The numbers vary, but a quick google shows that gay men are more common than lesbians.)

And yes, there are attractive men in videogames, and attractive females in videogames, but attractive isn't the same as sexual - especially in cases where the sexuality is very obviously the intent. What is the male equivalent of the DOA Beach Volleyball franchise?
#152 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to portray volleyball, seriously that's it, it's how they dress when they play in real life, in swimsuits, it makes sense with the sand and such...
User avatar #159 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
Have you played any of those games? Volleyball is a very small part of it. And they specifically wrote into the engine a script to have the boobs jiggle independently. And the realism of the attire was not the intent, they were intended to be sexy, and so they were. Some of the outfits would put Borat's green stripe to shame.
#167 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
so you are A) saying borat is sexy, B) saying that they are sexy, not sexist, as you have clearly previously stated are two separate things, and C) saying that you have done enough research about this to warrant the fact that they have a separate engine for boobs, which i think is great, cause boobs are awesome, and boobs awesome enough to need their own system are the awesomerest...

also i have never played it, i'm not fond of sports games.
User avatar #173 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
A. Of course Borat is sexy, potassium does the body well

B. I think that's very important - yes they are sexy and not sexist, those are two separate things. The lack of sexy males in games is a bit sexist, but that doesn't automatically make all the sexy females in games sexist. To put it in an easier to understand way, it's unfair to craig to get a dollar and john not to get a dollar, but that doesn't make craig unfair.

C. I'm not a programmer, but I think I remember hearing something about all the work that went into the boob physics. A lot.
#174 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
to be fair how physics affect the human body fundamental differs from how it affects a hanging piece of flab, we have muscles that expand and contract to help us stay balanced and shit, and boobs really just flop around, so using a different engine for a different type of physics kinda makes sense to me

i've also never seen borat

how many male volleyball players do you see professionally? it's just like saying how many female professional football players do you see...
User avatar #179 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
It doesn't have to be volleyball, I just meant the overt sexuality
#180 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
but if we can apply things to one game, we can generalize, that's what bigots love to do, so why can't us logical people do it too...
User avatar #185 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
That comment doesn't make sense to me, so I'll take this as a time to sign off. I'll reply to like 1 more thing, then go to bed.

Hopefully this doesn't turn into a shitstorm of other people reading things and choosing sides based on vague perceived ideals, and replying with stuff that has already been said, or god forbid someone's an expert and proves me wrong in a humiliating way. I just want nobody to notice this. That would be nice. The 0 thumbs throughout this is awesome. I like 0.
#190 - thorseph (09/10/2014) [-]
don't know what to say really, goodnight to you then
User avatar #128 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
You could probably find it somewhere. There's no point in arguing this further because you use ad ignorantiam and confirmation bias. You also have circular reasoning and false equivocation. You're also full of bullshit.
User avatar #136 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
And now I'll proceed in ad hominem: did you just google "logical falicies" and decide to just pick a few and throw them around? You sound like a child who just learned a new word and wants to use it at any opportunity, but doesn't quite understand its usage.

And even if my argument was weak, you would be committing argumentum ad logicam. Pointing out any weakness in my argument doesn't automatically render your argument correct. If I said "the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean," that doesn't prove that the sky is red.
User avatar #138 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
No. You're not correct and even furthermore, you're still not correct. What you're looking for is argument from fallacy, which I still didn't do. I never said I was right just because everything you say is utter bullshit. What I've stated is that everything you say is utter bullshit and I refuse to continue with someone who only says bullshit.
User avatar #155 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'd think that if my argument is so fallacious, that it would be very easy for you to present a counter argument refuting everything I say. But instead, you withdraw completely from this conversation.

I am not a doctor, and have no medical license, but it seems more like you're suffering from a case of the sour grapes. See, that's funny because it's a fable about a pissy fox. You're the pissy fox in this scenario. I don't know what I am; the tree? My role is no the basis of the humor value of this statement.
User avatar #164 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I told you that what you've said is bullshit and that I don't feel like wasting my time refuting you. You won't listen anyways. No one is changing anyone's minds. You want to see flopping penises in video games and that's not what's sexually attractive. I'm a bisexual male and I know that that's not going to sell a fucking game. Everything I've read from your arguments is all ignorant and bullshit so I'm done. You should consider rethinking your views on how to market. You should also learn that only an idiot would say you're wrong just because your argument is writhing with fallacies. Fallacies aren't a standard of right or wrong and not everything is fucking black and white. One final thing, when someone who refutes you backs out of continuation because of how flabbergasted they are at your sheer stupidity, you shouldn't consider that a victory.
User avatar #181 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
I'm reasonable all throughout this thread, until you. The first guy was just stupid, but you pretend to know what the fuck you're talking about, and that's what bothers me. Your false arrogance. You couldn't refute me, and so you insult me and blanket everything I said as "bullshit". Even if I didn't believe what I'm saying, I would at least respect that it's well thought out, but you don't have that kind of tact - you just got pissy and accused me of cheating. You made it all about me, something that I didn't do once. Enjoy the grapes.
User avatar #193 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I refuted you from the beginning and you failed to provide any proper response, only giving me a solitary cherry-picked rebuttal. Then after I refuted that, you kind of devolved from rebuttal's and assumed what I would read in your other comments would be much better, so I read that and saw that you're an idiot who doesn't understand marketing, human biology, or sex.
User avatar #192 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Once again, you're still wrong and full of bullshit. Want your arguments refuted that badly? Fine. Sexualization is subjective. It's not all black and white. Anything can be sexualized and it occurs in the mind. You say that an attractive male isn't sexualized and I say that's bullshit. He is. An attractive male has sexy muscle tone, a charismatic smile, and nice hair, those are turn-ons. That's sexualization. It's not fucking black and white. It's not shirtless = sexualized and shirt = non-sexualized. There are people that find feet sexual in nature for goodness sake, and I'm on of them. Penises, tits, and vaginas don't even have to be sexual. Have you never seen nudity in art? Statue of David must get you going if we're using your standards. I'm certain all those doctors performing life-saving surgery on women to remove breast cancer get really fucking horny when they see their tits. You're the worst kind of wrong, wrong and you believe everything you say anyways.
User avatar #203 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>implying I never said anything about sexualization with the intent of sexualization

Oh look, nothing you just said is relevant because it doesn't refer to context or intent. Fancy that.

intent
User avatar #212 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
At the end of the day, if floppy penises sold well, it would already be done. IE you don't understand marketing. Oh and no one has to be represented equally in any manner, mainly due to it being an art and someone else's intellectual property that they have full control over. Make your own game. Call it "Floppy Penis Simulator 2017." Cry when no one buys it. Then end your life.
User avatar #360 - demandsgayversion (09/10/2014) [-]
>appeal to tradition
User avatar #373 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
Look man, you need to read and stop throwing around meme arrows. I didn't say floppy penises won't sell because boobs have always sold. That would be extremely wrong because boobs haven't always sold. Female characters used to be defined far more simply in the retro gaming era. It wasn't until gaming became largely popular that "intent sexualization" occurred. You're also still trying to convince me, that in a world where dev software is easily available, you shouldn't make your own game to match exactly what you want. I can tell you that no fucking dev is going to make you a floppy penis game because it's disgusting. I'm all for diversity in video games, and "intent sexualization" should never be demonized. It's a shame that none of that matters. You buy games based on the story and mechanics, not how much the main character's penis flops. Unless you're an idiot.
User avatar #367 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
And I'm the one that doesn't understand fallacies. Nice argument from fallacy.
User avatar #211 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
>meme arrows

Oh well would you look at that. Cherry-picked rebuttal. It's almost like you do understand why everything you say is bullshit. You still sound like you're demonizing sex and I'm not convinced otherwise. Your starting statement even features the word slut. You obviously find an "intently" sexualized women slutty and therefore degraded in value. I wasn't sure if you understood anything you read, so I'll lay this out for you, even "intently" sexual things don't have to be sexual if the viewer doesn't find it sexual. It's still subjective and you must recognize that. As long as you aren't demonizing sex then we have no problems, but the way you word, you always sound like "intent" sexualization is negative. You're also horrible at picking an equal way represent "intent" sexualization because a shirtless guy can be just as "intently" sexualized as a busty female. It's still subjective. The developer could spend hours working on a characters feet because they find that sexy and want that to be a sexy aspect, then no one finds it the same way save for a few. That fits perfectly in the parameters of "intently" sexualized.
#44 - And were it the other way around would it still be greeted the…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/10/2014 on The future of america,... +7
User avatar #135 - skysailor (09/10/2014) [-]
This is actually one of the best references for the image.

It's from an episode where Ike, Kyle's little preschool brother, ends up in a relationship with a young, attractive teacher. Instead of taking it seriously, all the men just say "Niiiccceeee"

Just pointing that out.
User avatar #141 - imtheparty (09/10/2014) [-]
I get that. I've seen the episode. Just pointing out more double standards.
User avatar #144 - skysailor (09/10/2014) [-]
Yeah there's definitely a double standard. No argument there.
User avatar #82 - fawkwayne (09/10/2014) [-]
thejokeandyou.jpg

the joke is that was the subject of a south park episode (dunno name, just the one with Ike & his kindergarten teacher)
#11 - >scrolling compilation >find your own OC >awwyiss.jpg 09/10/2014 on So I heard you like 4chan +11
#21 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 09/10/2014 on well thats 4chan for you +133
#64 - subspacessparta (09/10/2014) [-]
#53 - profkitty (09/10/2014) [-]
#4 - Nonono, you've got it wrong. In video games, costmetics are th…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/08/2014 on 4chan 0
User avatar #5 - iridium (09/08/2014) [-]
Right, I forgot about that definition.
[ 68 Total ]
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 0 / Total items point value: 0

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)