Anonymous said: 'White people can't experience racism' isn't US centric. It is world centric. The whole world suffers from white supremacy and indeed, poc cannot be racist. Prejudiced, but not racist. Racism comes from white supremacy, which got it's start all over the world before settling down in the US. As in most places.

kckilgannon:

critically-acclaimed-queef:

recoveringfrommyconvictions:

uniwolfwerecorn:

Nice try, anon.

First of all, the term PoC has its origins in anglo-american usage, but it’s not an internationally acknowledged one. Mostly because international organisations and global institutions simply know better than to divide everything literally into black and white - and because the artificial dichotomy between white and non-white doesn’t do justice to the complexity of racism in large parts of the world. So unless you want the whole world to adopt a term that makes even Hitler’s raciology look like a sophisticated attempt at acknowledging diversity, please stop using it in a global context.

PoC cannot be racist. Prejudiced, but not racist.

That’s a very convenient excuse, wouldn’t you say? 

Unfortunately it’s nonsense. Racism is universal, it doesn’t depend on color of skin. That’s just the most obvious and, in the USA, the most prevalent form.

But, hey, according to your logic, the Holocaust wasn’t motivated by racism, because guess what, Jews were, to the majority, white. They were considered a different race, which had nothing to do with their color of skin and everything to do with their ethnicity and religion. So, good to know that my ancestors weren’t really racist when they burned down synagogues and sent people to Auschwitz.

Arbeit_macht_frei

image

http://asolf.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/verbrennungsfen.png

Clearly racism only happens to PoC.

The invasion of European countries by Germany during WWII also had nothing to do with racism, yay! Russia, which lost roughtly 27 millions of people during the war, will be relieved to hear that all of that had nothing to do with Adolf Hitler’s conviction that the people belonging to the  “Slavic race”, despite being what is largely considered white, were inferior to “Aryans”.

image

Really, I’m so glad we could clear this up. History, re-written because the USA presented the world with a new definition of racism. Congrats! As a German, I’m fully on board. We were just prejudiced. Maybe the tiniest bit nationalist, but it’s not like that was in any way related to racism. Except, maybe, in Africa, because clearly that was racism, yes?

I’m also glad to hear that the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis isn’t motivated by racism in the least - or is it? Depends, I assume, on whether you define one of these groups as white and the other as non-white. Are the Israelis white? So does that make them the oppressing group, according to your logic? Or are the Palestinians? Funny how it’s that easy to tell the racist guys from the non-racist ones by looking at whose skin is a tad lighter, huh? 

Peace and Friendship between Israel and Palestine

How about a bit more of backward logic while we’re at it?

"My ideology says that there is no such thing as racism against white people.  Ergo, everyone who experiences racism cannot be white."

The Turkish must also be white then because they were racist toward Armenians (to the point of genocide, just saying.).

http://koptisch.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/aleppo.jpg

But if Turkish people are now white, then they cannot possibly victims of racism themselves, right? As someone living in Germany, with a large Turkish minority, I’m so glad to hear that. Nothing to see here, folks, just a bit of prejudice, obviously.

Oh, and clearly the Hutu in Ruanda were white too when they slaughtered up to a million of Tutsi in the culmination of a racist conflict that had been brewing for decades.

http://cdn4.spiegel.de/images/image-22063-topicbig-xdzt.jpg

But I’m sure you want to blame colonialism fort that? I mean, clearly it’s not as if these people had any agency when they started slaughtering their neighbours, right?

Srebrenica

Srebrenica ring any bells to you? Former Jugoslawia? It’s really hard to tell someone’s color of skin based on their skeleton, but according to your logic, based on the fact that this skeleton belongs to the victim of an internationally acknowledged genocide, they have to have been a PoC.

Really, I’m having fun with your theory, because it leads to such really enlightening statements like that the Irish are PoC, or that Eastern European people are PoC, and sometimes Italian or Spansih people too, depending on who you ask. So much fun to be had with white and PoC, like you wouldn’t believe.

Nobel Prize For Irish People For Saving The EU

http://www.europeword.com/images/poland/polish-people6.jpg

image

All PoC now?

Funny how someone is labeled as white when you want to point out that they have privilege, and as PoC when you want to explain that they are victims of oppression and racism. Like, people from South America which  was colonialized by white Europeans, who are now considered Latino/Hispanic and therefore PoC within the USA?

Like, this guy:

176687123

Is he white? He’s a Spanish football player. The Spanish are usually considered white, right? But as soon as you find out he’s been born in Argentina, that makes him a PoC, yes? That’s Lionel Messi for you, an enigma.

This guy with the slightly doubtful expression:

He’s white, right? Unfortunately, he’s a German late repatriat born in Poland, and let me assure you, there’s plenty of prejudice and systematic racial discrimination happening against people like him in Germany. Miroslav Klose. I think he’s looking that way because he just found out he’s now considered a PoC, something that probably never occurred to him before.

But, again, how convenient for every single PoC living in northern America and Europe. What a great opportunity to claim solidarity with every other marginalized group on this world and blame it all on white supremacy.

Like, this woman, much oppressed, so sad:

image

Just like these people: 

Jesiden aus der Stadt Sindschar im Irak machen sich auf den Weg zur syrischen Grenze.

Or these:

Der Vertreter der FAO in Sudan, forderte Abdi Jama Adan der sudanesischen Regierung und der internationalen Gemeinschaft zusammenarbeiten, um weitere Folgen in diesem afrikanischen Land (Foto Archiv) zu verhindern

There’s no difference, really.

Guess what? That’s a really fucked-up way to deny the agency and responsibility of PoC in our western society. Because PoC make up half of the USA, but as long as you call it white supremacy and break it all down to a white/non-white dichotomy, the fact that all these PoC are directly benefittting from and contributing to western supremacy can be ignored.

Last time I looked, US American PoC were very much a part of their nation. Unless you want to claim they are not. Unless you want to claim that they are not actually a part of the country they are living in, were born and raised in. Unless you want to claim that they are not actually demanding a long overdue fair share of their country’s wealth and power - only that both wealth and power are a result of yes, supremacy, and they are actually an active part the oppressing group. Global exploitation. Capitalism. Western supremacy, if anything.

But, hey, I’m sure the people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, countries severely affected by US military intervention, will be able to tell that all US American PoC are just poor oppressed, powerless creatures - especially Barack Obama, who is really nothing but a brainwashed tortured soul weighed down by racism, it’s not like he’s in a position of power or something. I’m also sure the Chinese will be very grateful that they’re labeled as PoC, meaning that the way they’re oppressing their own ethnical minorities is just prejudiced. I’m also sure Vladimir Putin has white privilege whenever he’s meeting the president of the United States. Unless, of course, you want to call Putin a PoC too.

Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama were all smiles

So glad we had this talk, anon. Now kindly fuck off.

Thank you

Next time a “PoC” tells me white people can’t experience racism/”PoC” can’t be racist I’m going to link them to this post. 

An anon asked me the same question the other day. Worded it exactly the same and everything. They really
are all just living in an echo chamber.
1,969 notes

Ideals

kazerad:

A few years back, I made a lot of forum posts that made people think of me as a horrible, manipulative person.  Like, I was very honest about the fact that I intentionally wrote characters in a way that would make people grow attached to them, and acknowledged that one of the benefits of writing Elder Scrolls fanfiction is that it gave me an automatic, interested audience. I’ve always been very open about the fact that I consciously make decisions in a way that will maximize their impact.

I haven’t really changed much in that regard, though I think people have come to understand me better. They know that I’m actually very passionate about the Elder Scrolls series and game design in general, They understand that I break things down into formulas because I want anyone to be able to do them. Even when I do something outright evil it’s out of a love of my fans and ideals.

Can you imagine what would happen if I said “Elder Scrolls fans are trash, I just use them to get my name out there”, or “games are for little kids, but assholes on the internet will still read it if I write about game deisgn”? I mean, surely, nobody in their right mind would get into writing about something they aren’t passionate about, nor would they outright attack their core audi-

image

O… oh.

This whole GamerGate thing is amazing if you look into it. Like, I originally didn’t care that a game designer slept with a reviewer. Except, then she started accusing people of misogyny and anti-feminism if they brought it up. I originally didn’t care about the whole journalistic integrity aspect of this. Except, then more and more journalists and developers started attacking gamers as not caring about feminism, and acting as though gamers weren’t literally their audience

Everyone implicated just keeps digging themselves deeper and deeper. You have a bunch of big-name gaming figures and journalists saying “let’s talk about the harassment of female gamers!”, and you have a whole bunch of gamers - and even feminists - saying “no, let’s talk about this whole journalism scandal you’re ignoring”. And then, you have a bunch of smaller or has-been gaming news outlets saying “Yes! Let’s talk about this journalism scandal”, while the more well-known journalists quickly change their tune to “yeah, maybe you’d talk about that… if you’re a fucking gamer!”

image

This started with one developer sleeping with a reviewer, and has descended into this frantic web of developers and journalists trying to talk about feminism instead instead of themselves. If you look at the #GamerGate tag on Twitter, people are trying to flood it with pictures of babies behind gates and talking about how childish gamers are for not wanting to talk about feminism. It’s reaching the point that some bigger names in feminism are even stepping in and saying “yeah, this is not okay. This is people using feminism as a coverup.”

image

The important thing to understand - especially if you are a feminist - is that the people implicated in this are gambling on feminism to be their salvation. They’re trying to make this a feminist issue, so that if you speak out against Zoe Quinn, or corrupt journalism, or the nepotism in the indie gaming scene, or even the openly unprofessional and slanderous conduct of their writers, you are also speaking out against feminism. They are not supporting you, they are desperately clinging to you - trying to make it so an attack on them is also an attack on feminism (I wrote about this exact concept two months ago!). 

The best thing you can do is not let them make the tie. Say “yes, I am a feminist. Yes, let’s talk about the harassment of female gamers. But let’s do it after we talk about this separate issue with Zoe Quinn”. Don’t let them change the topic, don’t let them walk away from this, and don’t get discouraged when they call you a misogynist because you stood up for the very ideals feminism supposedly champions. 

No matter what happens, 4chan, gamers, and The Fine Young Capitalists have already won this. There are enough of them to independently support gamer-positive news sites and feminist organizations and be their own niche, with the added benefit of being non-exclusionary to outsiders. Remember, 4chan doesn’t care if they’re called misogynists. If gamers as a demographic also reach the point where they don’t care, that will be a huge loss to feminism. If you make people choose between being feminists or gamers, all it’s going to do is reduce the number of people who identify as feminists - even if you reduce the number of gamers even more.

I guess what I’m saying is don’t be stupid. This is a beautiful real-world illustration of many of the things I write about. You can see defensive generalization, you can see information control, you can see helplessness fetishization, and you can even see offensive fear tactics happening right now. You have a very real villain, posing as a hero, applying these ideas to save their own hide. 

Whether it ultimately works or fails, it will be a beautiful example of social manipulation. 

EDIT: I feel I should add that we saw a gaming fracture like this once before. People who were dissatisfied with the casualization and entry barriers in the gaming industry broke off and formed “indie gaming” - a niche market of games by-and-for gamers. Now, you are seeing those same two elements re-emerge in indie gaming. The question is simply whether it will stamp them out or relive its genesis with a new split. 

Understanding the Angry Gamer

askagamedev:

One thing I’ve noticed is that, within the gaming community, there are always the really angry gamers. Extremely vocal gamers who are vehemently angry with a developer about things. It is usually because of some design decision or implementation about the game that just rubbed some of the players the wrong way. And boy, do gamers love to hold grudges.

image

If you work on games, you too will probably see them at some point. Hopefully you won’t have to deal with them directly - that’s what community management is for. But it always helps to understand your player base, because it helps to translate the things they say into actual useful feedback.

Read More

517 notes

rivendude:

Riven ad

rivendude:

Riven ad

(via lostinmyst)

15 notes

tapehook said: I don't think Anita Sarkeesian's videos should be treated as an extension of the PMRC mindset. She's pointing out misogynistic tropes in video games, not advocating censorship. I mean hell, she starts her first video in the series saying that even though she's pointing out problematic aspects of games, that doesn't mean those games shouldn't be played or enjoyed. I don't understand why she's getting as much flack as she is.

tekblr:

theneedledrop:

Anita is getting flack because she’s an ignorant outsider. I’m not even a gamer, and this is apparent to me.

Whether you agree the content Anita showcases is misogynistic, offensive or not, most of her videos function on the same, flawed premise: That the negative gender stereotypes she finds in these games are harmful to the gamers that play them. She argues that these games somehow ingrain negative gender stereotypes in the individuals that play. They hurt women via perpetuating these stereotypes, essentially.

This is pure, unsubstantiated BS. Anita would never fund an actual study with the tens of thousands of dollars she’s raised, because she knows any such study wouldn’t work in her favor. It’s easier to buy a bunch of video games, cherrypick the most offensive parts for ignorant viewers, and then keep the rest of the money for yourself and your organization, right?

You’ve gotta wake up to the truth: Anita’s videos are about as effective and as enlightening as an elementary school screening of Reefer Madness

Media—especially popular media—reflects already-existing norms, ideas, concepts, and sentiments in a society, it doesn’t dictate them to consumers. Slasher flicks don’t make serial killers. Grand Theft Auto doesn’t increase the probability of shooting sprees. Gangsta rap doesn’t create gangs. The game Bully doesn’t create bullies. Reading 50 Shades of Grey probably doesn’t increase the likelihood of the reader getting tied up and whipped for sexual pleasure either.

If EA Games were to somehow create and sell a video game titled Mysogyny: Women Suck, the only people who would buy and enjoy such a game would be individuals who already agreed with the game’s clearly stated ideology. Anyone else buying and enjoying the game probably just dabbles in whatever fantasy the game presents during gameplay only. 

The probability of this game somehow CREATING a misogynist is about as likely as your local library’s copy of Mein Kampf creating a Nazi. Any such result would be minuscule if charted in a study of any sort.

As a kid, teen, and adult, I’ve been exposed to TONS of media that has displayed women as the weaker, more submissive, and more sexually desirable gender. However, this is not something I feel is reality. Why? Strong female role models, good upbringing, friends, family, amazing wife, and plenty of real-life interactions with women. FUCK A VIDEO GAME! A healthy reality ALWAYS trumps a fantasy. 

If you really want to change hearts and minds when it comes to gender roles in society, you’ve got to work on changing that society’s reality, not its media—especially media that so explicitly deals in fantasy. I know we tend to blame the media for a lot of our ills, but your real-life interactions and role models play a larger role in guiding your moral and social outlook than any music, movie, game, or book you’ll ever consume.

Anita is on the most foolish of errands, but y’all are eating it up like a hot pizza. Looking for positive gender roles in a game like Hitman is like looking for positive gender roles in any of the three Expendables films. There’s nothing applicable to real life in Hitman because the game’s not meant to guide anyone through real life. It’s a violent video game, not a dating advice show. There aren’t a whole lotta healthy social norms in the game because it’s not meant to portray any sort of normality.

NOW DON’T GET IT TWISTED: I do understand that violent, male-pandering video games persist in the video game industry. They make a lot of money, yes. And I completely acknowledge that a lot of what’s in games like Hitman, Manhunt, and Grand Theft Auto isn’t exactly, uh, healthy when it comes to the gender roles displayed. There’s a definitely a lack of female leading roles in many games, too.

However, it’s not like there aren’t alternatives here. There are plenty of non-violent, positive indie and mainstream games out there that would love more customers. And there could be MORE if we supported this sect of the industry. If Anita really cared about the future of the video game industry in relation to her cause, well, then she’d encourage all of her fans to purchase video games that work outside the negative gender stereotypes and violence of games like Hitman. It’s that simple. Supply and demand might have created Hitman, but it can just as easily create games with positive messages and gender roles, and it already has. You just have to buy them and be willing to support future releases that fit in with your taste.

But Anita is no gamer, and most of her supporters aren’t either. They’re outsiders that want to see change in a market they don’t participate in. Anita’s lack of experience is plain as day, yet, she’s lauded as some kind of expert. What if we applied the same angle to me right here:

Would you take my metal reviews seriously if I owned no metal records? Didn’t listen to metal? Had no real history with metal? Disliked metal? Constantly criticized metal with surface-level complaints like it being too loud, satanic, violent, angry, and perpetuating dangerous, overly masculine gender stereotypes? No, you wouldn’t. No one—except people equally ignorant to metal—would take me seriously. I’d be an ignorant outsider, which Anita is when it comes to gaming.

And I still stand by my PMRC comparison, too. I see similarity in her determination to find social dangers where there really are none. Yeah, Anita has nowhere near the same level of power or political influence, and she probably never will. And she probably won’t try to pull off the same censorship stunts due to the inevitable failure of trying to enforce or legislate any such censorship. It would be more beneficial to her to stay on the sidelines and collect her fundraising bucks as she highlights games she deems misogynistic. I agree America’s got a long way to go when it comes to creating social equality between the genders, but video games are nowhere near the root of the issues we need to address. They’re just an easy target for the quick to complain.

All in all, it’s same shit, different decade. People have been whining and moaning over “harmful” media for generations. And it should be no surprise that those desperately seeking to be offended lose every time. You can be on that side if you want, but just be a good sport when you take your “L”.

This.

Also touching on another issue that I’ve noticed lately, specifically twitter-mobbing and all of this attempting to browbeat people who disagree with you by labelling them as bigot or misogynist (which, due to its rampant misuse, has figuratively lost all meaning), resorting to ad-hominem (which, tends to reads as “I concede but I’m gonna be snarky because I’m stubborn”) as well as using straw-man arguments and regurgitating misinformation is getting people nowhere.

I swear, discourse has become a lost art on the internet. It’s gotten to the point when I’ve seen people rationally and fairly politely call out people on this bullshit only to be responded to with accusations of harassment or just straight up blocked, mainly from the SJW-types that are supposedly seen to be more open-minded. Silencing and avoiding any discourse on a subject that you’re actively trying to bring to attention  to and change just makes you look like and ignorant hypocrite (and kinda fascist).

There are assholes on both sides of this argument, there are some genuine misogynists (and trolls just looking to get some kicks out of thin-skinned crybabies) as well as idealistic SJW’s, who seem to conveniently disregard the reality that there exists people who view issues which you may dedicate your entire being to, as non issues, and become consistently shocked and outraged by this. It’s one of the wonders of being human - having differing opinions, this is why discourse is so important, because it brings about understanding, instead of shit-flinging and name-calling.

Sarkeesians decision of having comments disabled on a video, dissertatin- wait, for it to be dissertated, the subject would have to actually have been studied* - talking about an issue to address, doesn’t encourage discourse - yes there will of course be unconstructive shitheads in the comments  because Youtube, but from her standpoint there would be a lot more to gain than lose from this.

This entire situation (over the past few weeks in particular) has been a complete cluster-fuck and I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

*image

2,349 notes

tapehook said: I don't think Anita Sarkeesian's videos should be treated as an extension of the PMRC mindset. She's pointing out misogynistic tropes in video games, not advocating censorship. I mean hell, she starts her first video in the series saying that even though she's pointing out problematic aspects of games, that doesn't mean those games shouldn't be played or enjoyed. I don't understand why she's getting as much flack as she is.

theneedledrop:

Anita is getting flack because she’s an ignorant outsider. I’m not even a gamer, and this is apparent to me.

Whether you agree the content Anita showcases is misogynistic, offensive or not, most of her videos function on the same, flawed premise: That the negative gender stereotypes she finds in these games are harmful to the gamers that play them. She argues that these games somehow ingrain negative gender stereotypes in the individuals that play. They hurt women via perpetuating these stereotypes, essentially.

This is pure, unsubstantiated BS. Anita would never fund an actual study with the tens of thousands of dollars she’s raised, because she knows any such study wouldn’t work in her favor. It’s easier to buy a bunch of video games, cherrypick the most offensive parts for ignorant viewers, and then keep the rest of the money for yourself and your organization, right?

You’ve gotta wake up to the truth: Anita’s videos are about as effective and as enlightening as an elementary school screening of Reefer Madness

Media—especially popular media—reflects already-existing norms, ideas, concepts, and sentiments in a society, it doesn’t dictate them to consumers. Slasher flicks don’t make serial killers. Grand Theft Auto doesn’t increase the probability of shooting sprees. Gangsta rap doesn’t create gangs. The game Bully doesn’t create bullies. Reading 50 Shades of Grey probably doesn’t increase the likelihood of the reader getting tied up and whipped for sexual pleasure either.

If EA Games were to somehow create and sell a video game titled Mysogyny: Women Suck, the only people who would buy and enjoy such a game would be individuals who already agreed with the game’s clearly stated ideology. Anyone else buying and enjoying the game probably just dabbles in whatever fantasy the game presents during gameplay only. 

The probability of this game somehow CREATING a misogynist is about as likely as your local library’s copy of Mein Kampf creating a Nazi. Any such result would be minuscule if charted in a study of any sort.

As a kid, teen, and adult, I’ve been exposed to TONS of media that has displayed women as the weaker, more submissive, and more sexually desirable gender. However, this is not something I feel is reality. Why? Strong female role models, good upbringing, friends, family, amazing wife, and plenty of real-life interactions with women. FUCK A VIDEO GAME! A healthy reality ALWAYS trumps a fantasy. 

If you really want to change hearts and minds when it comes to gender roles in society, you’ve got to work on changing that society’s reality, not its media—especially media that so explicitly deals in fantasy. I know we tend to blame the media for a lot of our ills, but your real-life interactions and role models play a larger role in guiding your moral and social outlook than any music, movie, game, or book you’ll ever consume.

Anita is on the most foolish of errands, but y’all are eating it up like a hot pizza. Looking for positive gender roles in a game like Hitman is like looking for positive gender roles in any of the three Expendables films. There’s nothing applicable to real life in Hitman because the game’s not meant to guide anyone through real life. It’s a violent video game, not a dating advice show. There aren’t a whole lotta healthy social norms in the game because it’s not meant to portray any sort of normality.

NOW DON’T GET IT TWISTED: I do understand that violent, male-pandering video games persist in the video game industry. They make a lot of money, yes. And I completely acknowledge that a lot of what’s in games like Hitman, Manhunt, and Grand Theft Auto isn’t exactly, uh, healthy when it comes to the gender roles displayed. There’s a definitely a lack of female leading roles in many games, too.

However, it’s not like there aren’t alternatives here. There are plenty of non-violent, positive indie and mainstream games out there that would love more customers. And there could be MORE if we supported this sect of the industry. If Anita really cared about the future of the video game industry in relation to her cause, well, then she’d encourage all of her fans to purchase video games that work outside the negative gender stereotypes and violence of games like Hitman. It’s that simple. Supply and demand might have created Hitman, but it can just as easily create games with positive messages and gender roles, and it already has. You just have to buy them and be willing to support future releases that fit in with your taste.

But Anita is no gamer, and most of her supporters aren’t either. They’re outsiders that want to see change in a market they don’t participate in. Anita’s lack of experience is plain as day, yet, she’s lauded as some kind of expert. What if we applied the same angle to me right here:

Would you take my metal reviews seriously if I owned no metal records? Didn’t listen to metal? Had no real history with metal? Disliked metal? Constantly criticized metal with surface-level complaints like it being too loud, satanic, violent, angry, and perpetuating dangerous, overly masculine gender stereotypes? No, you wouldn’t. No one—except people equally ignorant to metal—would take me seriously. I’d be an ignorant outsider, which Anita is when it comes to gaming.

And I still stand by my PMRC comparison, too. I see similarity in her determination to find social dangers where there really are none. Yeah, Anita has nowhere near the same level of power or political influence, and she probably never will. And she probably won’t try to pull off the same censorship stunts due to the inevitable failure of trying to enforce or legislate any such censorship. It would be more beneficial to her to stay on the sidelines and collect her fundraising bucks as she highlights games she deems misogynistic. I agree America’s got a long way to go when it comes to creating social equality between the genders, but video games are nowhere near the root of the issues we need to address. They’re just an easy target for the quick to complain.

All in all, it’s same shit, different decade. People have been whining and moaning over “harmful” media for generations. And it should be no surprise that those desperately seeking to be offended lose every time. You can be on that side if you want, but just be a good sport when you take your “L”.

There’s a particularly good rant on YouTube called “Tropes vs. People in Video Games”. The author makes the point that Anita’s criticism is unhelpful because it only attacks one tiny facet of a larger problem: that games that attempt to have stories, by and large, undermine those stories and the characters therein by being badly and sloppily written (most are really just thin Excuse Plots, a handy coathanger on which to drape the mechanics and gameplay), and that therefore no character — male or female — comes off very well when considered in the context of the game as a whole. The Tomb Raider reboot was good not because it featured a strong female character as the protagonist, but because it had a well-rounded protagonist at all. (And I like the little detail that’s apparently going to be in the second game, that Lara is seeing a shrink for PTSD regarding the hundreds of people she had to kill in order to get out of the first game alive.)

2,349 notes

peeblespair:

Photo

peeblespair:

Photo

7 notes

Rob|и (backwardn): i watched crit1kal's five nights at freddy's vid (and by extension finally exposed myself to the game itself)
Rob|и (backwardn): and wow that game is actually kind of profound in the current industry
Rob|и (backwardn): instead of focusing on sudden jump scares or excessive gore the game lets you just stew in the knowledge that those things are at most a few rooms away and you can see them coming every time
Rob|и (backwardn): you know that they'll
Rob|и (backwardn): uh
Rob|и (backwardn): shout at you
Rob|и (backwardn): if you don't keep an eye on them
Rob|и (backwardn): and because of the atmosphere and the general creepiness of animatronics as well as your lack of tools or even movement it makes for a rare moment in video games where you can truly feel fear
Rob|и (backwardn): dread is such a powerful tool to use in the horror genre that video games don't utilize very well and five nights expertly makes it the seminal tool of its horror
Rob|и (backwardn): So I feel it definitely deserves the notice it's gotten so far
16 notes

it-goes-both-ways:

tosaveoursouls:

claimingmylife:

it-goes-both-ways:

captaindrprofessorsupermcawesome:

LOOK AT HOW WELL THIS IS SOURCED

That aside I need to double check this because I can almost guarentee this is a statistic that has been taken out of context and spun, I WILL REPORT BACK WITH THE NEWS

Also twice the non reciprocal means that women fight back to their abusers and men don’t

It doesn’t mean that women are committing twice the amount of harm

Here, have 286 sources. Happy now?

No? Have 1700 then.

I just can’t bravo

I don’t mean to be insensitive here. But has anyone thought MAYBE the rates are higher because BASICALLY MOST assaults to female go unreported?

How can you possibly have even the slightest inkling of how many crimes go unreported? Why be so disappointed that you have to imagine masses of women being secretly beaten and abused when you see stats like this? If it showed the opposite you’d be lapping it up, or even saying that the number female victims are still not high enough.

2,951 notes

My biggest nightmare….

zsilverwolf:

Five Nights at Freddy’s + Silent Hills (P.T.) crossover

image

Robbie and Bonnie by ColorgasmFreak

http://colorgasmfreak.deviantart.com/art/Robbie-and-Bonnie-476574905