Women who play video games
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
Women almost NEVER play video games where I live. The ones who do are either (a) someone's girlfriend or (b) just being
silly/stupid/you name it... I was in an arcade with Joe and a girl fought him. Of course she sucked, but this time I knew she
would suck because I never see a woman who wins. This is not a good attitude for me to have because I usually never encounter
sexual discrimination in myself like this.
I think there are women in this newsgroup. Can any woman who knows how to play come out and let me know about this post? What is
it like being a woman playing video games? Joe says he saw a girl kick ass once in SSF2T with Ken, but I've never witnessed
anything like it. I gotta know that there are women who can kick ass at video games too! ...Ricardo
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
>I gotta know that there are women who can kick ass at video games too! ...Ricardo
*looks in Cammy White's direction*
Jenn Dolari
> *sigh* I've often said if I ever fight a woman who beats me at Samurai
> Shodown I will have found my soulmate.
::cracks knuckles:: :)
> I think there are women in this newsgroup. Can any woman who knows how
> to play come out and let me know about this post?
Sure...and here we are....
> What is
> it like being a woman playing video games?
1) A lot of snickering, giggling and derision from other non-game playing
girls.
2) A lot of snickering, giggling and derision from guys with inflated
egos.
3) A little bit of fun when someone takes you seriously enough to play you
and
3a) The awe when they guy (or girl) sees you know how to play the game.
> Joe says he saw a girl kick ass once in SSF2T with Ken, but I've never
> witnessed
> anything like it. I gotta know that there are women who can kick ass at
> video games too! ...Ricardo
Heck, I even played in a few (very local) tourneys before I got ont he net
in '92. a bad experience made me stop tourney playing, and since I don't
think the Alpha, VS or SF3 series are as good as SSF2T, i've stayed out of
the arcades, except to play MK4 or this really cool bowling game my
sweetie got me into. :)
Jenn
[But then again, I was into video games and PCs since I was eight...two
thirds of my life ago! My god, I'm old...]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHUN LI - SHEEVA - KITANA - SONYA BLADE - MILEENA - SINDEL - CAMMY
ROSE Strength. Beauty. We have no equal in the kingdom. KING
PAI - SAKURA dol...@dragondata.com ANNA - MAI
JADE - ELLIS http://www.dragondata.com/~dolari SOFIA - NINA
HSIEN KO Not all warriors are called "Sir!" MICHELLE
CHAOS - MORRIGAN - CHARLOTTE - NAKORURU - CHAM CHAM - FELICIA - ORCHID
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultima
Hmm. Since I've been living in this country, I've yet to see a woman
play any fighting game who was actually being serious (though my friends
in LI used to mention this girl who used to kick ass at Tekken 3, though
I never saw her personally).
Back home (in Dat Hell Hole, aka Trinidad) though, I can recall two
instances of two serious fighting women:
1) When SF2:WW was being played like mad, there was this 10 year old
Chinese girl who used to STOMP on opponents twice her age and size (I
think she was primarily a Chun player). She and her two brothers, both
older than her (one was in the late teens), were all awesome (to us poor
scrubs anyway) players. I never played against her personally (not from
intimidation, I just never got the chance). And the last time I saw here
was in 1992 - she seem to vanish soon after CE came out, as did her
siblings.
2) Last summer I played against this unattractive (read: ugly no ass)
teenaged girl in Hyper Fighting (which is still played EVERY DAY in some
areas back home; too bad 95% of them all play Ken). I suppose,
relatively, she could be considered as being able to kick ass, since her
Ken was no less competent than all the other Ken players there (i.e.
knew how to FB-DP trap and could perform Ken's ToD, plus she had some
set of mind games). Unfortunately, being the player that I am and being
considerably above her skill level, I was not really impressed (you
could say she was good for a girl if you want to be discriminatory, but
she was average in general). After she lost to me, she never played
against me again. I haven't been back home since then. That was the last
time I've seen a girl play a video game of any kind.
--
Ultima - The Right Arm of Scrub Voltron
http://members.xoom.com/Ultima1 - The Street Fighter RPG Manifesto!
http://members.xoom.com/ShinUltima - U's Ultimate Rambling Page
If an arcade doesn't have a version of SF or SS in it, then it's not an
arcade
kayin/ka khiong kwok
Jenn Dolari wrote in message ...
>[But then again, I was into video games and PCs since I was eight...two
>thirds of my life ago! My god, I'm old...]
** sigh ** You're not the only one. I still remember the old Atari bat and
ball game when I was a toddler. :')
Side note, mind elaborating on your "sweetie", we gotta get a guy to give
him a hard time for been called a sweetie on the 'net. (It's a guy thing).
:')
Cheers,
Ka.
=== In memory... ===
"Such is life" - Ned Kelly.
Wenchi Liao
Jenn Dolari <dol...@dragondata.com> wrote:
>On 25 Apr 1999, Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr. wrote:
>
>> *sigh* I've often said if I ever fight a woman who beats me at Samurai
>> Shodown I will have found my soulmate.
>
>::cracks knuckles:: :)
I see marriage proposals! :) :) :)
Mike Z
players.....
There's a couple of arcades near where I live, in Minneapolis, and
there's a black woman, probably in her mid-20's, who is incredibly good
(read: has *long* win streaks) in any game with Spiderman or Gambit,
and more so in MvC with both. ^_^ She's also skilled in EX2 with Chun,
and I'll tell you, she gets almost *no* derisive remarks from guys with
overblown egos anymore....they've all played her. :^)
Also, there's an incredibly good-looking girl I know who used to date
one of my friends (who mostly sucks at fighters but plays them anyway),
and he used to drag her to the arcade all the time and play XSF/MSF
while she watched. Whee. In her own words, she, "....was bored until
one day I saw [and played] that one over there [SSF2T]," and it's like
she lit up. For about 6 months now, I've been teaching her to play, and
at the very least she's become competent with Ken and quite annoying
with Fei Long.....now if she wasn't so boring in person.... :^)
On a side note - I never understood why girls get so much more crap from
egotistical guys....it's not like this is an activity where physical
size matters or anything....anyone with a brain and two hands (though
I've seen people who can play without that requirement) can be good, and
I'll tell you, percentage-wise, I've seen a lot more sucky guys than
sucky girls.
--
Mike Z--The Zangief Solution:
They jump/duck/punch/kick/Super/special/throw attempt?
Block or Tech Hit, (if applicable,) then SPD/FAB.
They die? Laugh. Then whup the computer.
MCTek
I walked all the way from MGM to Treasure Island to play it (a good 45
minute walk I believe). Obviously everyone there sucked (me included, but
mainly because I play better on the pad than on the stick) and 99% of them
picked Evil Ryu. After two hours of trying out Gen's counter punch (hee
hee) this HOT chick walked in. You can say she's...um...how should I put
it....a hooker. Yeah, I know, most hookers you see on Cops aren't all that
great looking, but this one was pretty damn sweet. No, I wasn't mistaken,
unless people dress like that for fun!
Soooo....she picked Evil Ryu as well, figures. BUT...she was good with
him. A very decent old-school player with super combo buffering thrown in.
She did cross-up, c.forward, shinku hadoken quite a number of times. She
kicked everyone's butt. At around midnight she left (time for work!!).
What an experience.
Also, I know some of you were expecting some sort of
hooker-joystick-gripping joke, but I chose not to tell any.
-MCTek
JB Gainz
>teenaged girl in Hyper Fighting (which is still played EVERY DAY in some
>areas back home; too bad 95% of them all play Ken).
Oh god.. did we really need to hear this part. You could have said "teen age
girl" and ended it. When you mention a guy you play against do you comment on
his appearance?
>you
>could say she was good for a girl if you want to be discriminatory, but
>she was average in general).
This keeps getting worse... oh man.
Didn't your mommy give you enough love as a child? = )
>That was the last
>time I've seen a girl play a video game of any kind.
>
Where do you live? Girls play video games all the time at my arcade. They
just don't play fighting games. I tried to get my friend to play MvC, but she
did not know what was going on. Even though she did well with Wolverine. It's
hard to teach the fireball motion to people who don't know how to use a
joystick.
JB GAINZ
Super saiya-jin Son Gohan
pasadena to be exact) and I played against an asian girl(somewhere
between 17 and 20) at MvC who used a WM/Venom combo and actually had a
win streak of about 14. Well, I played her with my WM/Roll combo and I
could see how she got her streak. But then again, this is the
dial-a-combo MvC, although i am admitting I had a poor showing against
her. Wish I could have caught her name or something before i left (:-) )
My cousin also plays the Alpha series and I have to admit she is very
good. Her primary users are Charlie, Guy and Adon. But looking through
some FAQs on Gamefaqs.com, what I deem good maybe above average for you
pros out there.
....just my 2 cents.
Ultima
>
> >) Last summer I played against this unattractive (read: ugly no ass)
> >teenaged girl in Hyper Fighting (which is still played EVERY DAY in some areas back home; too bad 95% of them all play Ken).
> Oh god.. did we really need to hear this part. You could have said "teen age girl" and ended it. When you mention a guy you play against do you comment on his appearance?
[snip]
I tell it like it is. But I suppose you're right, I could have left out
that part. However, it does add to this point: I've seen women play
fighting games. I've never seen any /good-looking/ women play fighting
games. No, that wasn't the issue; just an observation.
> >you could say she was good for a girl if you want to be discriminatory, but she was average in general).
> This keeps getting worse... oh man.
> Didn't your mommy give you enough love as a child? = )
You obviously missed the point. When I played her, I treated her as I
would have a male player, which is how I would expect a serious female
player to be treated. And since she used the EXACT same Ken tactics I
had seen a million times before and knew how to counter since 1993, that
meant that she was average. No disrespect, just the truth.
[snip]
I've seen women play games in the arcade, but almost never are they
serious about it. They'll do it because they're waiting for somebody
and/or they're bored. It's never a case where they play a game to try
and improve at it.
PermaJ
>him. A very decent old-school player with super combo buffering thrown in.
>She did cross-up, c.forward, shinku hadoken quite a number of times. She
>kicked everyone's butt. At around midnight she left (time for work!!).
>What an experience.
>
I didn't know Evil Ryu had a shinkuu hadoken.
oh yeah, I know this girl at school who plays MvSF on breaks, but she sucks.
Also, since I'm a Virtual On person, I know two girls who play. They're pros.
Cammy White
> Women almost NEVER play video games where I live. The ones who do are either (a) someone's girlfriend or (b) just being
> silly/stupid/you name it... I was in an arcade with Joe and a girl fought him. Of course she sucked, but this time I knew she
> would suck because I never see a woman who wins. This is not a good attitude for me to have because I usually never encounter
> sexual discrimination in myself like this.
There's a couple of reasons for this... Mostly what Jenn Dolari said. Here are a couple...
We're looked down on by other girls because playing video games is usually 'for boys'. They think it's silly. Of course, some girls
play non-fighting games, like Puzzle Bobble and those Beatmania types, but fighting games are typically testosterone fests, so there's
an underlying feeling that we're unwanted. Besides, how many guys out there can stand to have an ego bruised in a 'man's game'?
We're looked down on because people assume video games are a 'man's game'. Since there aren't many girls playing, everyone
automatically assumes they can't play. I got tired of all the funny looks I got at the local arcade, so basically I stay home, even
though I visit every once in a while. I guess people just assume I'm waiting for a boyfriend.
> I think there are women in this newsgroup. Can any woman who knows how to play come out and let me know about this post? What is
> it like being a woman playing video games? Joe says he saw a girl kick ass once in SSF2T with Ken, but I've never witnessed
> anything like it. I gotta know that there are women who can kick ass at video games too! ...Ricardo
Actually, I'm not good. I'm a scrub. I originally got drawn into Street Fighter because I thought it was a neat game, and that I liked
the storylines behind the characters. I then found out there was a lot of skill involved, and I endeavored to learn how (so I could
see the endings, naturally. ^_^). The gameplay got to be fun, too.
The biggest reason I don't like playing in the arcades is because of the funny looks I get. Girls who think I'm a tomboy, boys who
think I don't know what I'm doing, and that kind of leery look I get from guys who seem to think that because I play games, I'm at the
arcade to pick up guys. Then I'm basically stuck at home practicing against the CPU. No wonder I'm a scrub. ^^
If there was a fighting game geared towards girls... maybe then? Similar to those dance games, but maybe a little more interaction,
we'd be able to break the social barrier. Maybe. ^_^
--Cammy, the philosophical Scrub.
"Studying hard? Hardly Studying!"
"Get me off what?"
"O_O;"
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
bleah... anyone who thinks video games are a "man's game" can go straight to hell, as far as I'm concerned.
There are so many things to hate about people...
Joe Zaza
girls
>play non-fighting games, like Puzzle Bobble and those Beatmania types, but fighting games are typically testosterone fests, so
there's
>an underlying feeling that we're unwanted. Besides, how many guys out there can stand to have an ego bruised in a 'man's game'?
Most guys have this feeling on the top of their heads... it's one of those mental barriers that need only to be confronted before
they realize it's stupid as hell. Same with racism, sexism, ageism, and... a whole bunch of other isms... =)
>We're looked down on because people assume video games are a 'man's game'. Since there aren't many girls playing, everyone
>automatically assumes they can't play. I got tired of all the funny looks I got at the local arcade, so basically I stay home,
even
>though I visit every once in a while. I guess people just assume I'm waiting for a boyfriend.
Girls play drums, trumpets, sports, things that all involve brains and hand-eye coordination. I'm jealous of the way Sheila E
plays drums! I never gave her a funny look until someone said something about it (and I believed it, since I was a kid and
basically accepted what older people said) but when I confronted myself with the whole thing, I dropped it like a hot potato. You
notice when you are a kid you look at people of different races, colors, and creed from yours as they were people until some
family or group deposits those stereotypes inside of you? It pisses me off that I blindly live with those biases until college...
They can't tell you anything in public school because they get in a lot of trouble with some parents when a kid comes home and
says "All people are equal."
>Actually, I'm not good. I'm a scrub. I originally got drawn into Street Fighter because I thought it was a neat game, and that I
liked
>the storylines behind the characters. I then found out there was a lot of skill involved, and I endeavored to learn how (so I
could
>see the endings, naturally. ^_^). The gameplay got to be fun, too.
C'mon, any girl who has played consistently, however consistently is to be defined, is good! I know that is biased but I think you
need the support! I got into SF cuz of the storyline, too... I got into DOOM because of the storyline!! That's funny... Doom has
skin for a storyline, but I played to unfold it. It made me sick back in the day when people skipped the cinema scenes in Ninja
Gaiden... =# It's just stupid how people just play to play and not for the whole world behind the game...
>The biggest reason I don't like playing in the arcades is because of the funny looks I get. Girls who think I'm a tomboy, boys
who
>think I don't know what I'm doing, and that kind of leery look I get from guys who seem to think that because I play games, I'm
at the
>arcade to pick up guys. Then I'm basically stuck at home practicing against the CPU. No wonder I'm a scrub. ^^
Scrape them off... I get funny looks cuz I am a talker... I don't give a damn! I perform victory dances when I win and make Jim
Carrey faces when I get a good hit in and everyone stares at me!! I just think that in 5 years, I'll come by this town again in my
limousine shining my Rolex in their faces... even if it isn't true... but being able to express yourself despite popular criticism
(the faces, the smirks, even the speech because usually it isnt preceeded by a thought and dosent make sense) makes you stand out,
really. If a guy approaches you with any of the stupid talk, hit with something and remember to think before you say it, because
they usually can't respond to thinkers.
>If there was a fighting game geared towards girls... maybe then? Similar to those dance games, but maybe a little more
interaction,
>we'd be able to break the social barrier. Maybe. ^_^
That would only perpetuate the gender stereotypes that keep us apart. You want a little more interaction? Face those morons at the
arcade... you'd be taking a step.
Jenn Dolari
> Side note, mind elaborating on your "sweetie", we gotta get a guy to give
> him a hard time for been called a sweetie on the 'net. (It's a guy thing).
> :')
The funky thing is, my sweetie ain't no guy. :)
Jenn
Jenn Dolari
> I see marriage proposals! :) :) :)
Tha'ts what ALT.FAN.JENN.DOLARI.WEDDING-PROPOSALS is for. :) Check your
nwsrc, it really exists! :)
Jonathan Winkler
he was good and I really wasn't doing well that day anyway. Well, after several other challenges, from out of nowhere came a girl,
somewhere around 20, with a baby in tow. She came in, picked A-Blanka and basically whipped his ass 2 for 2. Possibly the guy was
just underestimating her, but she definitely knew what she was doing; she knew how to combo into Blanka's roll SC, she could roll 3
cms from the guy and start the electricity right off. The baby started up a few minutes after that so she had to leave the game for
the washrooms but after seeing what had just happened I couldn't stop smiling. That's pretty much the only time I've ever seen a girl
that could play.
--
---------------------------------------------------------
.-. .---------------------------------. .-.
| | | Jonathan Winkler * | |
.-|-' | jonw...@concentric.net * .-|-'
| | | Digipen Institute of Technology * | |
'-' '********************************** '-'
"Hey, pick Iori."
"Okay."
"No not her! I said *Iori*."
"That *is* Yuri."
Kao Megura
Besides, how many guys out there can stand to have an ego bruised in a
'man's game'?
Reminds me of a funny thing that happened when I played MvC a while back.
This guy was playing and a woman joined in, so he went easy on her (If I
was a woman, I'd be pissed, since these guys think they're being nice but
actually aren't putting in any effort and making it less fun to play).
However, she ended up beating him anyway, even when he went back to
"serious tactics" after his 1P was almost killed (Spidey). It was funny to
see this guy freak out as she whittled his life down w/ Ryu. :)
>
> We're looked down on because people assume video games are a 'man's
game'. Since there aren't many girls playing, everyone
> automatically assumes they can't play. I got tired of all the funny looks
I got at the local arcade, so basically I stay home, even
> though I visit every once in a while.
I don't know about elsewhere, but where I live (CA bay area), most women
bring along boyfriends or just plain friends when they go to arcades (not
that seeing them play is commonplace). In fact, I rarely see women playing
alone, probably for the reasons you mentioned. You should grab a pal and
drag them down to your local arcade ;)
> I guess people just assume I'm waiting for a boyfriend.
Speaking of, I hate boyfriends who make their gfs play. That happened to
me once, and so I just played normally, and beat her pretty fairly (you
know how it is, people who don't play just mash on the buttons and can make
it pretty hard anyway, just due to predictability). Anyway, the guy got
all steamed, as if I was supposed to have let her get the round or
something. Damn, it's just a game, and she didn't seem to care at all,
anyway (which shows that she had more sense than he did).
= Kao Megura =
"I don't like Dan at all. I've come to the conclusion that
I really despise the shotos, even half-assed ones." - Ultima
"DaN iS Da MaN!!!@#@$%!!! He beats BlAnKa for Fr33!" - BoB
"Everything he can do, Ken and Ryu can do bettter! - gainaz, talking about Dan.
"There are people that have been called gifted students, based on
tests and other means of evaluating one's talents. How do I know?
I am one." - Onaje Everett
Bathe in Dan's glory at: members.xoom.com/megura
Tell me why Dan rules at: kmegura (at) hotmail (dot) com
Kakarot007
playing, we encourage it. Whenever I see a female I am fascinated, whether she
is good or bad. If she is without man, I think it's one of the coolest things
to see. All these guys who bring their girls to the arcade are trying to
sucker them into playing,(at least that's what my friend does)they try to teach
their girls combos and all that, so I(and that friend) find it incredibly sexy
when a nice feminine honey is on the SF3, too bad it's too few and far between.
Ace-ISM
Jonathan Winkler <jonw...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:374B8B28...@concentric.net...
> Once I walked in to my local arcade to play some A3 and some guy had a
10+-win streak going with A-Gen. I played him a few times but
> he was good and I really wasn't doing well that day anyway. Well, after
several other challenges, from out of nowhere came a girl,
> somewhere around 20, with a baby in tow. She came in, picked A-Blanka and
basically whipped his ass 2 for 2. Possibly the guy was
> just underestimating her,
I suspect the guy may not have played his hardest with her. Eg. how many of
us guys here, would play their hardest against a mother? Seriously. I mean
anyone doing that would just feel really really evil. =|
>but she definitely knew what she was doing; she knew how to combo into
Blanka's roll SC,
You can combo into it?
she could roll 3
> cms from the guy and start the electricity right off. The baby started up
a few minutes after that so she had to leave the game for
> the washrooms but after seeing what had just happened I couldn't stop
smiling. That's pretty much the only time I've ever seen a girl
> that could play.
--
Ace-ISM
http://i.am/karinsan
"I do not need such cowardly attacks as the Hadouken ..."
-
Milo D. Cooper
This discussion was had at length here on a.g.sf2, over two years ago.
You can find an excerpt at:
http://x1.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=192670270&CONTEXT=925126080.65732655&hitnum=19
Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
--
____________________________________________________
| Milo D. Cooper http://www.milos-chalkboard.net/ |
| |
| Stanley Kubrick (1928 - 1999) |
| Rest In Peace |
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
EC
>JB Gainz wrote:
>>
>> >) Last summer I played against this unattractive (read: ugly no ass)
>> >teenaged girl in Hyper Fighting (which is still played EVERY DAY in some areas back home; too bad 95% of them all play Ken).
>
>> Oh god.. did we really need to hear this part. You could have said "teen age girl" and ended it. When you mention a guy you play against do you comment on his appearance?
>
>[snip]
>
>I tell it like it is. But I suppose you're right, I could have left out
>that part. However, it does add to this point: I've seen women play
>fighting games. I've never seen any /good-looking/ women play fighting
>games. No, that wasn't the issue; just an observation.
>
>> >you could say she was good for a girl if you want to be discriminatory, but she was average in general).
>
>> This keeps getting worse... oh man.
>> Didn't your mommy give you enough love as a child? = )
>
>You obviously missed the point. When I played her, I treated her as I
>would have a male player, which is how I would expect a serious female
>player to be treated. And since she used the EXACT same Ken tactics I
>had seen a million times before and knew how to counter since 1993, that
>meant that she was average. No disrespect, just the truth.
>
>[snip]
>
>I've seen women play games in the arcade, but almost never are they
>serious about it. They'll do it because they're waiting for somebody
>and/or they're bored. It's never a case where they play a game to try
>and improve at it.
Ultima, either you are two into mimicking Alex's winning poses or you
are just blind. Ask OneShot or Tony Lim about the REALLY cute Tekken3
player at Nathan's. She was good enough to beat the Eddie scrubs (and
I think she beat Tony too.. :) but not really a good player. But
definitely very cute. And played to PLAY. Which is why I respected her
and promptly kicked her ass over and over again.
-E
PS No I don't give second rounds either unless I am experimenting with
something. But that's a whole other old archived thread at
Dejanews....
Cammy White
"Milo D. Cooper" wrote:
> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
EXCUSE you?!?!? I think not! There's a lot of room for skill development in anything girls
do, and just because it doesn't involve video games does not mean you're free to stereotype all
females like that. I play games, sure, and I know other girls who play games too (albeit not
fighting games). Still, I have (female) friends who are in training for a marathon, who play
basketball and who are very involved with community affairs. They are seeking their entertainment
in this fashion, but I can scarcely say there is no thought or skill development involved.
Unless, of course, you can go ahead and run over 26 miles without stopping right now.
Even among the girls who play, they play games and try to get better. Tetrinet is very
popular among my friends both male and female, and so is Puzzle Fighter and Mario Kart (both
incarnations). These games are *not* skill-less, brainless games. I'm surprised and shocked that
you would say something to categorize an entire GENDER like this.
> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
> social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
We're out there, we're just pushed into hiding because people have a tendency to make broad
generalizations about us...
--Cammy, the feminist Scrub
Beef
> *sigh* I've often said if I ever fight a woman who beats me at Samurai Shodown I will have found my soulmate.
>
> Women almost NEVER play video games where I live. The ones who do are either (a) someone's girlfriend or (b) just being
> silly/stupid/you name it... I was in an arcade with Joe and a girl fought him. Of course she sucked, but this time I knew she
> would suck because I never see a woman who wins. This is not a good attitude for me to have because I usually never encounter
> sexual discrimination in myself like this.
>
> I think there are women in this newsgroup. Can any woman who knows how to play come out and let me know about this post? What is
> it like being a woman playing video games? Joe says he saw a girl kick ass once in SSF2T with Ken, but I've never witnessed
> anything like it. I gotta know that there are women who can kick ass at video games too! ...Ricardo
Granted I'm not a girl, but I do have a buddie who I taught to play SF3.
She's an Ibuki junkie. Yesterday she managed to rack up 8 wins in a row
in a half-rapid-poke-half-chain-into-hashin-sho style. Some of the guys
who don't know us (we're there every Fri+Sat for 4 hours at a time) kept
asking me, "Hey, is she yo bitch?" or "You got one helluva bitch." They
would laugh at her or not take her seriously until she knocked them out in
less than 20 seconds. She's completely new to video games and SF is the
only thing she enjoys. She's been playing SF for about two years now and
loves it. She still doesn't understand how to discover combos through
experimentation, but if she sees and Ibuki combo once or twice, she'll
integrate it into her play rather successfully. She's quite good.
Mark
Poster and Speaker of Useless
Things, Holder of Big Sigs and Milwaukee Man
Extrordinaire.
SF Code v5.0
{K(SFA2)+>++ D(I)++ Y(I)+>++ All(EX+@)+}
[ac ch- cn c+ cc+ 2+ g m+ n+:- o++ os+ p
r(++ARK) +s+ sp- st+ ta t tm-- th- tr--:+ v++]
Shaun Patrick Mcisaac
Suck it up. Those are the same looks you get playing magic in
view of non-gamers. Those are the same looks you get even talking about
D&D, or any other RPG (sans FFVII), because "they're the same thing
really." Well they have about as much in common as Schindler's list and
Terminator 2 but yah, "they're the same thing."
And don't even think about anything anime related. Then you're a
pervert in addition to a socialital outcast.
<ZONK Scrub comment>
IMO, if you've mastered the urge to jump in, you're no longer a
scrub. Any other definition puts the scrub/nonscrub ratio at about 9999 :
1. One can only hope it's not that bad.
--
SPM...
PINE 3.95 SIGNATURE EDITOR Folder: INBOX 0 Messages
^G Get Help ^X Exit ^R Read File ^Y Prev Pg ^K Cut Text ^A BBIW
^C Cancel ^J Justify ^W Where is ^V Next Pg ^U UnCut Text^T To Spell
James Margaris
>Oh, jeez...
>
>"Milo D. Cooper" wrote:
>
>> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
>> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
>> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
>> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
>> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
Dude, this is *fucked up* statement, if for no other reason that
playing SF is not exactly about "thought or skill development." Yess, there is
some skill involved, but a totally arbitrary skill that is worthless outside
of SF and other video games.
A lot of women like more "women oriented" type games like Myst, puzzle
games, etc. These games take as much thought and skill as other video games.
(read: In the grand scheme of all things, not very much)
Please don't claim that playing SF build intelligence or valuable
reflexes or whatever. Playing SF is fun. It's a hobby. It needs no other
justification.
If you want to claim that men are more interested in developing
thought or skill SF would *not* have been my first choice, nor would sitting
on the couch drinking beer and watching football, sitting at a bar drinking
beer and watching women, etc.
Video games are geared towards men, appeal to men, and are
traditionally male. Click on the Medic in Starcraft 2. (Or whatever it's
called) Play Duke Nuke'm. See any male strippers?
Ever see the underware on Ken? How about the size of Juli (Juni's?)
chest?
End of story.
James M
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
>> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
>> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
>> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
>> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
>
> do, and just because it doesn't involve video games does not mean you're free to stereotype all
> females like that. I play games, sure, and I know other girls who play games too (albeit not
> fighting games). Still, I have (female) friends who are in training for a marathon, who play
> basketball and who are very involved with community affairs. They are seeking their entertainment
> in this fashion, but I can scarcely say there is no thought or skill development involved.
> Unless, of course, you can go ahead and run over 26 miles without stopping right now.
Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations. I'm talking
about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
allocates for work or hobbies. Running track, playing ball (unless
you mean casual play), and feeding the homeless are not things that
one does when one has some time to kill.
> Even among the girls who play, they play games and try to get better. Tetrinet is very
> popular among my friends both male and female, and so is Puzzle Fighter and Mario Kart (both
> incarnations). These games are *not* skill-less, brainless games. I'm surprised and shocked that
> you would say something to categorize an entire GENDER like this.
And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
fond of soaps.
>> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
>> social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
>> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
>
> We're out there, we're just pushed into hiding because people have a tendency to make broad
> generalizations about us...
Pardon me, but that's stupid. Why hide? What unbearable suffering
do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public? (Women are
cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
anyway.)
Lantis
may sound like a wuss), women have the same possibilities as men in video
games as anyone else. They have two hands, and they have the same
skill-learning capabilities that men can have (of course, that is assuming
that you are not a macho pig and think women are airheaded by nature). So,
it is not so far-fetched that a women can become a next Alex Valle (I
can't believe I said that, whew...), but the problem is...not many women
are trying. Honestly, and God knows why, women and arcades are something
like oil and water...don't mix at all. Sometimes they do come him and
throw a quarter somewhere, but mostly, they are always making company with
their boyfriends on a date (you can tell because the guy has a STRONG
lotion on him whew!!!!!).
As some of you may recall, I met my ex-girlfriend at an arcade, and lasted
about 14 months before breaking up (and then she began talking stench at
my name!!!), Well, in January, I was playing this 9 year old boy in SFA 3.
He was playing a X-Ryu, I was playing V-Cody (he was getting frustrated
because of my dodge :). We were talking about how he should do combos more
frequently (he seemingly didn't pass the time of FB/DP traps). Suddenly,
this gorgeous woman comes in, and I was so impacted, that I almost lost
with the kid (fortunately I regained my wits). Turned out she was her big
sister, and shouted at him like mad, since he had been for over 2 hours in
there. I apologized myself (for entertaining him), but she just kept
wailing on the kid all the way out of the arcade. I then knew she worked
at a clothes store near the arcade (that's why her little brother always
goes). I actually dated her until she became my girlfriend a month ago.
Now, she even accompanies her brother and watch me pound him. I'm teaching
her how to use Ibuki right now, since she is actually a student of
Ninjitsu (Shinto Kan, I guess she is learning...).
Arcades are not a bad place after all...:)
***************************************
* Kailu Lantis *
* The Knight whom protects Justice *
* *
* April 1999 coolest stuff: *
* Fei, Rick Strowd, Vegeta *
* *
* "Well, I don't feel like losing to *
* a pathetic one such as yourself. *
* Have at you, wimp!" *
* -Kazama Sogetsu, Samurai 4 *
***************************************
Stuart White
: Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations. I'm talking
: about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
: allocates for work or hobbies. Running track, playing ball (unless
: you mean casual play), and feeding the homeless are not things that
: one does when one has some time to kill.
Just curious: What do the guys near you do in their free time? I am
assuming they are *very* different to the guys around here, who don't
actively participate in skilled/mental free-time activities any more than
the women do.
[...]
: And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
: these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
: games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
: but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
: fond of soaps.
Good. I don't think a few isolated cases would constitute proof...
: Women are cowards, in general
...and I assume you have something substantial to support this
generalisation with?
Cammy White
> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations. I'm talking
> about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
> allocates for work or hobbies. Running track, playing ball (unless
> you mean casual play), and feeding the homeless are not things that
> one does when one has some time to kill.
Um... if a hobby isn't a pasttime, what is it? O_o Aside from that, it *is* their pasttime. They play
ball (intramural b-ball), they train for a marathon (they're students, not on any team, just because
they want to), they do community stuff because they like it. It's a hobby. It's a pasttime.
> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
> fond of soaps.
You didn't say generally. You started off by calling all women 'chicks', then went on to make broad,
sweeping generalizations about an entire gender.
> Pardon me, but that's stupid. Why hide? What unbearable suffering
> do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public? (Women are
> cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
> anyway.)
There's a couple of reasons I don't go to arcades. Let me rattle them off for you.
1. Arcades are usually dismal places, without good ventilation or lighting, and usually dirty (due to
snack food or whatever on the floor and stuff). I don't think I've ever seen a full-fledged arcade with
windows. Make them brighter, clean them up, maybe I'd go more often. That is, IF...
2. Many guys I've met have looked down on me with a haughty 'You're inferior to me because you're
female' attitude. They don't treat me with respect. People let me win because they're surprised I'm a
girl. Then they're surprised when I am actually pulling off combos on them... playing some mind games
etc. I'm not a great player. I'm not even a *good* player. I'm a scrub, but I'd like to practice, and
I'd like to play against someone who wants to play against me, but if people don't treat me with
respect, I will take myself elsewhere.
Among the guys that irk me, the ones that bother me the most are the guys like you, Milo. I'm not a
coward. I just don't want to have to deal with stubborn, sexist pigs. I know if I *do* do anything, you
will discount it as me being the rare rare exception.
This reminds me of a long argument I had a long time ago. I love my God very much, and I was trying
to explain why to someone, and he just told me that he didn't believe anything I said because I was
looking through 2-inch thick Jesus glasses. Well, I said 'Maybe you're the one looking through 2-inch
thick atheist glasses'. If you automatically discount anything I say because I'm a "rare exception",
you're as much of a troll as JB Gainz...
Kenneth Schepers
Milo D. Cooper wrote:
> > Cammy White wrote:
> >> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
> >>
> >> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
> >> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
> >> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
> >> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
> >> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
> >
> > EXCUSE you?!?!? I think not! There's a lot of room for skill development in anything girls
> > do, and just because it doesn't involve video games does not mean you're free to stereotype all
> > females like that. I play games, sure, and I know other girls who play games too (albeit not
> > fighting games). Still, I have (female) friends who are in training for a marathon, who play
> > basketball and who are very involved with community affairs. They are seeking their entertainment
> > in this fashion, but I can scarcely say there is no thought or skill development involved.
> > Unless, of course, you can go ahead and run over 26 miles without stopping right now.
>
> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
please explain the difference. those things have always been the same in my book, but maybe there's a
new definition i haven't heard of yet ^_~
> I'm talking
> about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
> allocates for work or hobbies.
so you do you hobbies during work?
> > Even among the girls who play, they play games and try to get better. Tetrinet is very
> > popular among my friends both male and female, and so is Puzzle Fighter and Mario Kart (both
> > incarnations). These games are *not* skill-less, brainless games. I'm surprised and shocked that
> > you would say something to categorize an entire GENDER like this.
>
> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
> fond of soaps.
well, when does a statistic get so low it isn't a statistic anymore?
>
>
> >> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
> >> social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
> >> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
> >
> > We're out there, we're just pushed into hiding because people have a tendency to make broad
> > generalizations about us...
>
> Pardon me, but that's stupid. Why hide? What unbearable suffering
> do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public? (Women are
> cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
> anyway.)
*lol* and what do you base that on? geez, i'd hate to meet the women you hang out with if that's your
opinion of them....
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
WhoaMoses
>hang out with if that's your
>opinion of them....
>
he probably doesn't hang out with women. none will go out with him, so this is
his feeble and ultimately unfair attempt to get back at them. heh, no dice my
friend.
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
>Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
>social creatures driven by pack-herding.
That's an incredibly sexist remark. Men are individualists, yes, but I'd say they're more driven by the need to conquer than
anything. Women have the more rational minds. They're just choked by (*cough cough*) society. Go back to your cave,
neanderthal.
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
> *snip*
You know what? Fuck you. You're a worthless human being if these are your beliefs. Women are more cowardly than men? Explain
the eons of oppression they endured at the hands of men. Examples? Foot binding, excision and witch hunting come to mind. Who's
fooling who? Men have a very low tolerance for pain. Who's a fucking coward?
Shoot yourself now and stop polluting the gene pool with your underdeveloped DNA.
Jenn Dolari
> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
I wouldn't say this of EVERY woman. But, damnit, it's a good majority.
Women are brouyght up in most cultures to think they're incomplete without
a man, that they can never out do a man or be better than a man because
then, they won't have a mate, and will be incomplete and not a whole
person.
Which is why you have cheerleaders, ditzbrains and abused women.
Occasionally, you get the Sakuras of the world who simply don't CARE what
others think of them, or people like me who don't care about what men
think of them simply because they're not out to impress them for a mate.
> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
> social creatures driven by pack-herding.
I think by being raised to believe so, people do. A woman who is told she
cna be anything she wants, independent of anyone else can accomplish a
lot. It's the mothers of the world who tell their daughters "You can't
get a man that way, and without a man, you are nothing" who make it so. :P
Thankfully, my mother stayed at work, my dad stayed atr work, and I was a
latchkey kid brought up on well written books. :) Femeninity, aggression
AND ambition all wrapped in one.
> The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
If there are two in this microcosm, there MUST be a measurable amount "out
there...."
Jenn Dolari
> There are so many things to hate about people...
I say nuke it all and let the cockroaches take over. :)
Ultima
[snip]
> Ultima, either you are two into mimicking Alex's winning poses or you
> are just blind.
Eh??? I mimic everybody's win poses, but what's that got to do with
this? And I AM virtually blind , you know ;)
> Ask OneShot or Tony Lim about the REALLY cute Tekken3
> player at Nathan's.
I KNOW, I KNOW. You guys told me about it, but I NEVER saw her. =(
You've seen me play: When I play, all that matters is what's on the
screen. D'oh... =\
> She was good enough to beat the Eddie scrubs (and
> I think she beat Tony too.. :) but not really a good player. But
> definitely very cute. And played to PLAY. Which is why I respected her
> and promptly kicked her ass over and over again.
Heh.
> PS No I don't give second rounds either unless I am experimenting with
> something. But that's a whole other old archived thread at
> Dejanews....
Right.
--
U
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
>> Land of the Rising Sun). They prefer to devote their free time to
>> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
>> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
>> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
>
> playing SF is not exactly about "thought or skill development." Yess, there is
> some skill involved, but a totally arbitrary skill that is worthless outside
> of SF and other video games.
You're missing the big picture. Guys play video games, and chicks
don't. This is a manifestation of the male's much greater fascination
with and attraction to mechanical systems, and the challenges provided
by analyzing and mastering them (which is, in turn, due to the male drive
of individual accomplishment, as I wrote before). It's the same reason
more guys are into cars, and sports, and computers, and chess, and
martial tactics, etc.
Women generally don't care about stuff like that. They are far more
preoccupied with seeking their own self-worth through other people (as
I wrote, they are much more social than men). Few things are more
exciting to women than being around a bunch of other human beings (pack-
herding); likewise, they find solitude acutely unbearable. Women
aren't individualistic -- which is why they all seem the same.
> A lot of women like more "women oriented" type games like Myst, puzzle
> games, etc. These games take as much thought and skill as other video games.
> (read: In the grand scheme of all things, not very much)
A *lot* of women, or more women than chicks who play other types
of video games? Virtually no women play violence-oriented games.
A few play the cutesy games. I don't see where "a lot" comes in.
> Please don't claim that playing SF build intelligence or valuable
> reflexes or whatever. Playing SF is fun. It's a hobby. It needs no other
> justification.
It builds intelligence and reflexes necessary to become better
at the artificial mechanical system known as Street Fighter.
> If you want to claim that men are more interested in developing
> thought or skill SF would *not* have been my first choice, nor would sitting
> on the couch drinking beer and watching football, sitting at a bar drinking
> beer and watching women, etc.
Unlike those other things you mention, playing Street Fighter is
an active pastime. Your comparison isn't valid; you would have made
more sense if you had written *watching* Street Fighter instead of
*playing* it, or playing football and dancing on stage instead of
watching someone else do those things.
> Video games are geared towards men, appeal to men, and are
> traditionally male. Click on the Medic in Starcraft 2. (Or whatever it's
> called) Play Duke Nuke'm. See any male strippers?
Bull. The characters that wear the least amount of clothing in
Street Fighter have always been male, by a longshot. Adon, Dee
Jay, Fei Long, and Zangief are probably the best proof of this.
And if chicks dig cute games, then where are the waves of female
DarkStalkers and Gem Fighter players? What's so "geared towards
men" about chess that women are put off by it? Would more women
be playing Tomb Raider if the hero were male? (Hell no.)
Get yourself a clue, head man.
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
>> you mean casual play), and feeding the homeless are not things that
>> one does when one has some time to kill.
>
> assuming they are *very* different to the guys around here, who don't
> actively participate in skilled/mental free-time activities any more than
> the women do.
They play video games.
>> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
>> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
>> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
>> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
>> fond of soaps.
>
> Good. I don't think a few isolated cases would constitute proof...
>
>> Women are cowards, in general
>
> ...and I assume you have something substantial to support this
> generalisation with?
Women like to be pursued. Figure it out. I have. If you need
a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit with the
ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
Cardmonkey
do with anonymity or the freedom to chat and mingle with people as well as get good (and help others get good) at the game in a less
competitive environment (not just one on one) but a more co-operative interdependant environment. I use to play Bomberman 2 on the
SNES alot with girls who could instantly grasp the concept and master things at thier own pace becasue of it's open-ended kind of
strategy(there was a lot of co-op play and last minute deceit involved to try to survive and win). If mashing buttons in a fighter
is what a lot of guys prefer and they complain there aren't enough girls who play the game with them, then I say you aren't looking
hard enough. Start playing something like Diablo or whatever and you'd be surprised where a lot of them hang out.
"Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr." wrote:
Shaun Patrick Mcisaac
Milo D. Cooper <mi...@milos-chalkboard.net> wrote:
> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
>Land of the Rising Sun).
I understand this is the case in Hong Kong, too. I think Jason's
story went something like 'The women there were better than most of the
men here' and 'You just can't watch that much SF and not pick anything
up.'
> They prefer to devote their free time to
>entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
>usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
>to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
>Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
>social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
>Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
Ok, care to explain why ALL of the native comp around here
is at exactly the same level: Shoto scrubs who jump too damned much. And
with a few exceptions, they're all men. Doesn't look to me like they were
very much into skill improvement. Do you have any idea how effective
"corner opponent, wait for the eventual jump, anti air VC for 75%" (I'm
not exaggerating, either, Tom) is?
As for thought, IIRC the #1 on our chess team here is a woman.
I'd say chess requires a bit of thought to play. You don't get
scholarships for chess here. Not a red cent. So please don't reply with
your "its a hobby, not a pastime" or whatever crap you spewed out at
Cammy.
(Sol, Wenchi, Zvi, Dale, Jack and Seth can all except themselves from
the shotoscrub comment.)
Dark Schneider
This certainly is an unusual turn of events. Milo... is that you? <scratches head> This has got to
be some kind of joke.
> >> Chicks don't play games (except for some Japanese women over in the
> >> Land of the Rising Sun).
Strike one. "Chicks", if you mean the yellow, fuzzy chicken infants, generally don't play games.
Lack of opposable thumbs prevents them from properly gripping controllers/sticks. Female members of our
species, on the other hand, do. They're just a rare breed shunned by their peers and belittled by
cavemen who haven't joined the 20th century.
> They prefer to devote their free time to
> >> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
> >> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
> >> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
Strike two. While on one hand, it does seem that you're trying to denounce this nonsense of
"wishing for completeness", your tone is all wrong. Women, regardless of any social pressure put on
them, still strive for excellence in most fields that require skill, professionally and "in their spare
time". Granted, plenty of women out there still fall under the "mousy wife" or "airhead cheerleader"
stereotypes, but THEY are the exception to the rule.
> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
Synonyms.
> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
> fond of soaps.
And? If the point you're trying to make is that women generally don't play video games... DUH!
There's no argument from anyone.
> >> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
> >> social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
> >> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
And this is a bad thing? Women generally do tend to have a wide circle of friends and enjoy
spending time with them. And? Is there something inherintly wrong with that? The kind of emotional
closeness and stability these friendships provide are something men need more of. That macho,
do-it-by-yourself shit is dead.
> What unbearable suffering do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public?
The same suffering women undergo everyday because the whole f'n world thinks they're "second best".
Women have to work twice as hard to earn half the respect. Bottom line.
> (Women are cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
> anyway.)
Strike three. While they may be the weaker sex (as far as genetic physical build goes), women are
not cowards. Men who hide behind weakly supported generalizations and stereotypes are cowards. C'mon,
Milo, you're better than this. Tell us this is a joke. Or perhaps an attempt to rattle some cages. Just
don't tell us you believe this horseshit.
> | Stanley Kubrick (1928 - 1999) |
> | Rest In Peace |
Amen to that.
--
Dark Schneider
"Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and
I'm not sure of the former." - Einstein
"I have to lie in the middle of the floor
Completely motionless not daring to breathe."
I am like this when the police finally find me."
"Follow your bliss." - Campbell
JB Gainz
>>games. No, that wasn't the issue; just an observation.
Ultima, sorry I was just being hard on you. I tend to like women more than
men. It bothers me when guys say things that seem remotely sexist. I guess
you could say I am a bit of a feminist. No, harm. I understand. = )
James Margaris
>In article <37245452...@milos-chalkboard.net>,
>Milo D. Cooper <mi...@milos-chalkboard.net> wrote:
[clip]
>>Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
>>social creatures driven by pack-herding.
I wonder if Milo is living in the same universe as the rest of us.
I know *many* individualistic men driven by the need to accomplish...oh yes,
so many of them, constantly working in Ryu-esque fashion to improve their
skills. Most of the guys I know, if they aren't hitting the non-fiction books
they're out doing physical excersize, practicing math and language so as not
to get rusty, engaging in intellectual conversation with their peers. A world
full of real go-getters.
Hah hah hah...watta joke. Go to a bar, then go to a library. Oops.
I think the biggest joke here is that SF was cast as a serious
self-improving activity that "individualists driven by the need to accomplish"
play. I love SF, but it's a dumb game in the end. Everyone has their guilty
pleasures, us included, but claiming SF is a self improvment activity is no
more rediculous than saying that bar-hopping men do so in order to improve
their visual accuity and stretch their necks.
I would even argue that *cheerleading* is more of a self-improvement
activity than SF. At least you got some excersize. (No, "rubbing" does not
count as excersize) (Yes, I do know I spelled excersize wrong, no, I can not
spell, thanks for asking)
James M
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations. I'm talking
>> about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
>> allocates for work or hobbies. Running track, playing ball (unless
>> you mean casual play), and feeding the homeless are not things that
>> one does when one has some time to kill.
>
It's what you do when you're doing something that isn't your job, but
could be considered a job. Athleticism and community service can lead
directly to occupation. Playing Street Fighter cannot.
>> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
>> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
>> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
>> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
>> fond of soaps.
>
> You didn't say generally. You started off by calling all women 'chicks', then went on to make broad,
> sweeping generalizations about an entire gender.
So what? That's how bland women are. Most every guy here will
acknowledge this (though not in public).
>> Pardon me, but that's stupid. Why hide? What unbearable suffering
>> do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public? (Women are
>> cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
>> anyway.)
>
> There's a couple of reasons I don't go to arcades. Let me rattle them off for you.
>
> 1. Arcades are usually dismal places, without good ventilation or lighting, and usually dirty (due to
> snack food or whatever on the floor and stuff). I don't think I've ever seen a full-fledged arcade with
> windows. Make them brighter, clean them up, maybe I'd go more often. That is, IF...
I don't go to such places, myself. This is no excuse.
> 2. Many guys I've met have looked down on me with a haughty 'You're inferior to me because you're
> female' attitude. They don't treat me with respect. People let me win because they're surprised I'm a
> girl. Then they're surprised when I am actually pulling off combos on them... playing some mind games
> etc. I'm not a great player. I'm not even a *good* player. I'm a scrub, but I'd like to practice, and
> I'd like to play against someone who wants to play against me, but if people don't treat me with
> respect, I will take myself elsewhere.
As you should. You yourself claim that you aren't good, though,
so why *should* guys respect you as a SF player? I know that *I*
wouldn't.
> Among the guys that irk me, the ones that bother me the most are the guys like you, Milo. I'm not a
> coward. I just don't want to have to deal with stubborn, sexist pigs. I know if I *do* do anything, you
> will discount it as me being the rare rare exception.
What's wrong with that?
> This reminds me of a long argument I had a long time ago. I love my God very much, and I was trying
> to explain why to someone, and he just told me that he didn't believe anything I said because I was
> looking through 2-inch thick Jesus glasses. Well, I said 'Maybe you're the one looking through 2-inch
> thick atheist glasses'. If you automatically discount anything I say because I'm a "rare exception",
> you're as much of a troll as JB Gainz...
Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
--
____________________________________________________
| Milo D. Cooper http://www.milos-chalkboard.net/ |
| |
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
>
> new definition i haven't heard of yet ^_~
No, but there is an old one. A pastime is something that cannot
be considered some form of occupation. That's the difference.
Watching TV, for example, is a pastime, not a hobby. So is shopping
for clothes.
>> I'm talking
>> about *free time*, i.e. what someone does outside the time that s/he
>> allocates for work or hobbies.
>
> so you do you hobbies during work?
So to speak. I've been programming and creating some form of visual
art since I was a lad, so in that respect, I have integrated my hobbies
into my work.
>> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
>> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
>> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
>> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
>> fond of soaps.
>
> well, when does a statistic get so low it isn't a statistic anymore?
When there's no need to take it into consideration where financial
gain is concerned.
Milo D. Cooper
>
> he probably doesn't hang out with women. none will go out with him, so this is
> his feeble and ultimately unfair attempt to get back at them. heh, no dice my
> friend.
*Shrug* Some women have gone out with me, some haven't. I rarely
have any desire to go out with a woman, since 99% of them are vapid
and needy, anyway. No character. And women wonder why we seem to
want nothing from them but sex! What else do they have to offer?
Milo D. Cooper
>
> your beliefs. Women are more cowardly than men? Explain
> the eons of oppression they endured at the hands of men. Examples? Foot
> binding, excision and witch hunting come to mind. Who's
> fooling who? Men have a very low tolerance for pain. Who's a fucking coward?
>
> Shoot yourself now and stop polluting the gene pool with your underdeveloped DNA.
Yawn. *Men* have been oppressed by men, too.
Cammy White
> It's what you do when you're doing something that isn't your job, but
> could be considered a job. Athleticism and community service can lead
> directly to occupation. Playing Street Fighter cannot.
They're not going to make it in the pros. There's no way they'll make money playing basketball or running.
We're not tall enough, not fast enough and not coordinated enough. We do it for fun. Heck, our IM team loses
most of its games because we ONLY play for fun (no training or practicing whatsoever). I don't see your
point.
> So what? That's how bland women are. Most every guy here will
> acknowledge this (though not in public).
I don't think I understand. Maybe it's because of my gender. I'm bland, so you make broad sweeping
generalizations about an entire gender. Right.
> I don't go to such places, myself. This is no excuse.
Um.. there's only 1 arcade around here not like this, and it requires a car to get to. Seeing as how I'm
vehicle-less, I'm not inclined to go to any.
> As you should. You yourself claim that you aren't good, though,
> so why *should* guys respect you as a SF player? I know that *I*
> wouldn't.
Yes, I'm not good, but I'm better than most scrubs.. I still get less respect than they do. What's up with
that?
> What's wrong with that?
It means you're a stubborn sexist that isn't willing to listen to me.
> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding hands?
Cambridge version of Old Testament says (concerning women in Ecc 7:26 and 28)
26: And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands:
whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her
Read it. This verse isn't talking about all women as you are, it's saying that the woman WITH SNARING AND
NETTING HEART is something people should avoid. This isn't some blanket statement about an entire gender. Do
you see me as some evil internet temptress trying to snare you?
28: Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman amnog all
those have I not found
Yes, girls who play games are hard to find. Maybe you're not looking in the right place.
--Cammy, the Bible-quoting Scrub
Milo D. Cooper
>
> Strike one. "Chicks", if you mean the yellow, fuzzy chicken infants, generally don't play games.
> Lack of opposable thumbs prevents them from properly gripping controllers/sticks. Female members of our
> species, on the other hand, do. They're just a rare breed shunned by their peers and belittled by
> cavemen who haven't joined the 20th century.
Because the 20th century is just *so* civilized! What with kids
making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
effort and resistance?)
>> They prefer to devote their free time to
>> entertainment that requires no thought or skill development (which
>> usually involves a lot of other people in the same frame of mind), or
>> to wishing they were with a guy, which would make them feel "complete."
>
> Strike two. While on one hand, it does seem that you're trying to denounce this nonsense of
> "wishing for completeness", your tone is all wrong. Women, regardless of any social pressure put on
> them, still strive for excellence in most fields that require skill, professionally and "in their spare
> time". Granted, plenty of women out there still fall under the "mousy wife" or "airhead cheerleader"
> stereotypes, but THEY are the exception to the rule.
Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
>> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
>
> Synonyms.
No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
>> And what would you say is the ratio of chicks to guys who play
>> these games? The number of men to every woman who plays video
>> games speaks for itself. I've seen guys who watch soap operas,
>> but I'm not going to offer them as proof that men are generally
>> fond of soaps.
>
> And? If the point you're trying to make is that women generally don't play video games... DUH!
> There's no argument from anyone.
Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
>> Men are individualists driven by the need to accomplish; women are
>> social creatures driven by pack-herding. The Jenn Dolaris and Cammy
>> Whites are so rare that they aren't even a statistic.
>
> And this is a bad thing? Women generally do tend to have a wide circle of friends and enjoy
> spending time with them. And? Is there something inherintly wrong with that? The kind of emotional
> closeness and stability these friendships provide are something men need more of. That macho,
> do-it-by-yourself shit is dead.
The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
(Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
answer.)
Anyone who has a bunch of friends is either an opportunist, or
a sad black hole of dependency on other human beings for his/her
own livelihood. In the latter case, this person exhibits just the
kind of excessive tolerance and lack of discriminating taste that
one would reasonably expect from someone with no character.
Ask a woman what kind of music she likes. The response is
almost always "I like all kinds." No character. No discriminating
taste. Vapid.
>> What unbearable suffering do you undergo by playing Street Fighter in public?
>
> The same suffering women undergo everyday because the whole f'n world thinks they're "second best".
> Women have to work twice as hard to earn half the respect. Bottom line.
And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
>> (Women are cowards, in general, but I'd like to have an answer to the question,
>> anyway.)
>
> Strike three. While they may be the weaker sex (as far as genetic physical build goes), women are
> not cowards. Men who hide behind weakly supported generalizations and stereotypes are cowards. C'mon,
> Milo, you're better than this. Tell us this is a joke. Or perhaps an attempt to rattle some cages. Just
> don't tell us you believe this horseshit.
>
>> | Stanley Kubrick (1928 - 1999) |
>> | Rest In Peace |
>
> Amen to that.
Seen Kubrick's _Barry Lyndon_? That movie depicts the very *essence*
of the aggregate of womanhood. Watch and learn.
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
>> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
>I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding hands?
The Bible is a crock anyway.
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
> Yawn. *Men* have been oppressed by men, too.
Your point being?
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> It's what you do when you're doing something that isn't your job, but
>> could be considered a job. Athleticism and community service can lead
>> directly to occupation. Playing Street Fighter cannot.
>
> They're not going to make it in the pros. There's no way they'll make money playing basketball or running.
> We're not tall enough, not fast enough and not coordinated enough. We do it for fun. Heck, our IM team loses
> most of its games because we ONLY play for fun (no training or practicing whatsoever). I don't see your
> point.
What are you talking about? Professional female athletes are
commonplace. Basketball, tennis, and various olympic sports are replete
with female athletes, many of them household names.
>> So what? That's how bland women are. Most every guy here will
>> acknowledge this (though not in public).
>
> I don't think I understand. Maybe it's because of my gender. I'm bland, so you make broad sweeping
> generalizations about an entire gender. Right.
This is an opinion formed over more than two decades of exposure to
the female deportment.
>> I don't go to such places, myself. This is no excuse.
>
> Um.. there's only 1 arcade around here not like this, and it requires a car to get to. Seeing as how I'm
> vehicle-less, I'm not inclined to go to any.
All women must think that all arcades are dungeons, then, because
there's ben a paucity of chicks (if any) in even the cleanest and
best-lit arcades that I've seen.
>> As you should. You yourself claim that you aren't good, though,
>> so why *should* guys respect you as a SF player? I know that *I*
>> wouldn't.
>
> Yes, I'm not good, but I'm better than most scrubs.. I still get less respect than they do. What's up with
> that?
Since you don't go to arcades often, how can you really tell how
much or how little respect you get versus these other scrubs?
>> What's wrong with that?
>
> It means you're a stubborn sexist that isn't willing to listen to me.
Only because I've learned that it generally doesn't pay to do so.
>> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
>
> I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding hands?
No, I'm saying that of *most* women. As I said before, the Cammy
Whites and the Jenn Dolaris are extremely rare.
> Cambridge version of Old Testament says (concerning women in Ecc 7:26 and 28)
>
> 26: And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands:
> whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her
>
> Read it. This verse isn't talking about all women as you are, it's saying that the woman WITH SNARING AND
> NETTING HEART is something people should avoid. This isn't some blanket statement about an entire gender. Do
> you see me as some evil internet temptress trying to snare you?
No, that's *not* what King Solomon (one of the wisest men ever to
have lived) is saying. There's a comma after "the woman." He's
making one of those evil blanket generalizations. Your convenient
interpretation is directly contradictory to this next bit:
> 28: Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman amnog all
> those have I not found
>
> Yes, girls who play games are hard to find. Maybe you're not looking in the right place.
Maybe. More probably, fewer than one in a thousand women are
worth my time, as the passage indicates. By my experience, it's
definitely looking that way.
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
>And women wonder why we seem to
>want nothing from them but sex! What else do they have to offer?
Come to think of it, what do men have to offer?
But hey, who cares, in fifty years the name Milo Cooper will mean nothing to anyone.
Of course, neither will my name, but at least I didn't live in ignorance. And I realize my own worth.
You're worthless. Face it.
I'm done, for real this time. Go masturbate somewhere.
*plunk*
Stuart White
:> Stuart White wrote:
:> Just curious: What do the guys near you do in their free time? I am
:> assuming they are *very* different to the guys around here, who don't
:> actively participate in skilled/mental free-time activities any more than
:> the women do.
:
: They play video games.
Is that the only skilled free-time activity they participate in? I doubt
very much that every guy plays video games to any great degree.
Women may not play as many video games as men, but they do participate in
other mental/skilled activities. Women read more than men do, for example.
:>> Women are cowards, in general
:>
:> ...and I assume you have something substantial to support this
:> generalisation with?
:
: Women like to be pursued.
And that supports the generalisation that they are all cowards how,
exactly?
: If you need a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit
: with the ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
*yawn*
Old news. You've been through _Titanic_ a number of times on different
groups - there is no need to repeat yourself endlessly. I assume your view
of women is based on more than just your observations about Titanic?
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>> Stuart White wrote:
>>>
>>> Just curious: What do the guys near you do in their free time? I am
>>> assuming they are *very* different to the guys around here, who don't
>>> actively participate in skilled/mental free-time activities any more than
>>> the women do.
>>
>> They play video games.
>
> Is that the only skilled free-time activity they participate in? I doubt
> very much that every guy plays video games to any great degree.
Well, you're wrong, frankly. The video game industry is more
profitable than the movie industry -- if you doubt this, see
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,319870,00.html or
http://eola.cs.ucf.edu/csdept/colloq/96-97/96-10-25.html. I'm
a professional in the business, for almost ten years, now, and
it's a fact. And as we all know, the video game industry is
*overwhelmingly* supported by the male consumer. If you can't
figure out what this means, here's a hint: the movie industry,
which caters to both sexes roughly equally, has met its match
by another industry that caters almost solely to men.
The statistics speak for themselves. Men *do* "play video
games to any great degree" -- very much so, enough to place
video games over movies with comparatively no support from the
female population.
I know WtF I'm talking about. Drop the politically correct
"women and men are equal" crap; nothing could be further from
the truth. Men and women are *extremely* dissimilar, and no
one should have to have this explained to him/her. It's obvious.
> Women may not play as many video games as men, but they do participate in
> other mental/skilled activities. Women read more than men do, for example.
*What* do they read? People magazine. Stephen King novels.
Women Are From Venus. Opera Winfrey Book Club selections. Pop
culture literary junkfood. Also, reading and analyzing are two
different things; the former really doesn't take any significant
effort or skill, and doesn't automatically lead to improvement
in the latter.
>> Women like to be pursued.
>
> And that supports the generalisation that they are all cowards how,
> exactly?
People who prefer to be pursued are passive. They tend to
make little or no effort toward achieving what they want. They
sit on their @$$es, waiting for life to happen to them, then
they whine about oppression and other b.s. when they find
themselves running in last place when the finish line is in
sight.
Because chicks tend to seek the establishment of their self-
worth through the approbation of someone else, rather than by
their own individuality, they fear rejection by other people
(especially men, whom they recognize as highly individualistic)
more than just about anything. As a result, they're afraid to
make themselves vulnerable, and instead prefer to be pursued.
Women loved _Titanic_ because it represented exactly what they
want in life: to be able to sit on their butts (as Rose, the
Kate Winslet character, did) and have a dashing pretty boy
come and tell them how wonderful they are, and fall in love
with them, and have sex in cool places. It also helped very
much that Kate Winslet was a little chubby (as Hollywood
actresses go -- she's still much better looking than your
average woman), so all the out-of-shape women out there could
go, "I'm fat, so I can get Leonardo too!" So much for the
death of chivalry and fairy tale princes.
I think you asked that question because you're curious, and
you sense the truth in what I say, and you wanted the answer to
a question that has been nagging you for years. Well, you have
your answer. What you do with it now is up to you.
>> If you need a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit
>> with the ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
>
> *yawn*
>
> Old news. You've been through _Titanic_ a number of times on different
> groups
... Because the female reaction to it was that strong, and
because most people have seen the movie, which makes reference
to it very convenient.
> - there is no need to repeat yourself endlessly. I assume your view
> of women is based on more than just your observations about Titanic?
Of course.
Milo D. Cooper
>>
>> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
>> I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding hands?
>
How so?
Milo D. Cooper
>
> >And women wonder why we seem to
> >want nothing from them but sex! What else do they have to offer?
>
> Come to think of it, what do men have to offer?
Not much, it's true (as I wrote earlier, with my Ecclesiastes
reference). But it's more than what most women have to offer.
What's a woman's minimum requirement of a man? Good looks and
financial success. Asking for anything more is excessive, and
is likely to lead to disappointment. What's a man's minimum
requirement? Good looks. Asking for anything more is excessive,
and is likely to lead to disappointment.
> But hey, who cares, in fifty years the name Milo Cooper will mean nothing to anyone.
> Of course, neither will my name, but at least I didn't live in ignorance. And I realize my own worth.
> You're worthless. Face it.
I'm rubber and you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me
and sticks onto you.
Milo D. Cooper
>>
>> Yawn. *Men* have been oppressed by men, too.
>
> Your point being?
That the root of oppression is opportunism, not sexism.
ka...@mpx.com.au
Jenn Dolari <dol...@dragondata.com> wrote:
> On 25 Apr 1999, Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr. wrote:
>
> > There are so many things to hate about people...
>
> I say nuke it all and let the cockroaches take over. :)
I actually think that ants would have a greater chance of survival. :')
So long live our new rulers! The ants! :')
Oh yeah, ignore my old signature. Gonna have to change that.
Cheers,
Ka.
--
=== A fight I liked to see... ===
Morrigan vs Kenneth Starr. It's too close to call. :')
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Stuart White
:> Stuart White wrote:
:>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
:>> They play video games.
:>
:> Is that the only skilled free-time activity they participate in? I doubt
:> very much that every guy plays video games to any great degree.
:
: Well, you're wrong, frankly. The video game industry is more
: profitable than the movie industry -- if you doubt this, see
: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,319870,00.html or
: http://eola.cs.ucf.edu/csdept/colloq/96-97/96-10-25.html.
It may be more profitable, but it is not as pervasive. More men watch
movies than play video games.
<About the reference - it is a year out of date and merely contains
speculation that games *may* outstrip movies for 1998 - was this actually
the case? I couldn't find any hard figures, but I didn't have time to
look thoroughly. Do you have a reference for a better source? Cheers.>
: I'm
: a professional in the business, for almost ten years, now, and
: it's a fact. And as we all know, the video game industry is
: *overwhelmingly* supported by the male consumer. If you can't
: figure out what this means, here's a hint: the movie industry,
: which caters to both sexes roughly equally, has met its match
: by another industry that caters almost solely to men.
Sure. I am not disputing that video games players are almost exclusively
male. I am disputing the fact that males are almost exclusively video
games players.
And if they are not all playing video games, what are they doing in their
free-time that is so mentally challenging?
: The statistics speak for themselves. Men *do* "play video
: games to any great degree" -- very much so, enough to place
: video games over movies with comparatively no support from the
: female population.
As I said, that is only in terms of profit.
: I know WtF I'm talking about. Drop the politically correct
: "women and men are equal" crap;
My belief is not based on political correctness - it is based on personal
experience.
: Men and women are *extremely* dissimilar, and no
: one should have to have this explained to him/her. It's obvious.
I know that men and women are dissimilar. But dissimilar does not imply
unequal.
:> Women may not play as many video games as men, but they do participate in
:> other mental/skilled activities. Women read more than men do, for example.
:
: *What* do they read? People magazine. Stephen King novels.
: Women Are From Venus. Opera Winfrey Book Club selections. Pop
: culture literary junkfood. Also, reading and analyzing are two
: different things; the former really doesn't take any significant
: effort or skill, and doesn't automatically lead to improvement
: in the latter.
I doubt that many games that guys play take much significantly more effort
or skill than literary junkfood. There are exceptions, some games are more
challenging and require some skill - but there are also books that require
more effort both to read and to appreciate, even if the woman does not
analyse the book in any depth.
[...]
: People who prefer to be pursued are passive. They tend to
: make little or no effort toward achieving what they want. They
: sit on their @$$es, waiting for life to happen to them, then
: they whine about oppression and other b.s. when they find
: themselves running in last place when the finish line is in
: sight.
: Because chicks tend to seek the establishment of their self-
: worth through the approbation of someone else,rather than by
: their own individuality, they fear rejection by other people
: (especially men, whom they recognize as highly individualistic)
: more than just about anything. As a result, they're afraid to
: make themselves vulnerable, and instead prefer to be pursued.
I do not agree that women seek to establish their worth through aquiring a
partner. I think that this may be true for some women, but not for the
majority in my experience.
I would also say that I do not think all (or indeed most) men are
extremely individualistic. The pack mentality is as strong in men as it is
in women, and many men will not fly in the face of popular opinion because
they fear rejection. We *all* seek approval subconsciously, to some
degree, regardless of gender.
[Titanic stuff sunk]
: I think you asked that question because you're curious, and
: you sense the truth in what I say, and you wanted the answer to
: a question that has been nagging you for years. Well, you have
: your answer. What you do with it now is up to you.
Don't go all I@I on me, now. ^_^
I asked the question because I do not sense any truth in what you say.
Perhaps I am not as perceptive as you, but I do not any basis for your
beliefs based on what you have said thus far.
I did want an answer, however, because I was curious what reasons you had
for your beliefs. I read all the stuff on deja news but it degenerated
rapidly, and your points were unclear. Also, it was a while ago so I
wanted to see if you had anything new to say.
:> Old news. You've been through _Titanic_ a number of times on different
:> groups
:
: ... Because the female reaction to it was that strong, and
: because most people have seen the movie, which makes reference
: to it very convenient.
I haven't seen it, so I'd appreciate it if you took your examples from
something else.
Shaun Patrick Mcisaac
>acknowledge this (though not in public).
Please keep your trolling at least mildly consistant. 2 posts
down you explain how cowardly women are, then tell us how men won't
"acknowledge this [..] in public." Hrm, every human being (except
MDCooper) = coward. I bow before your fantasically stupid statement, oh
Eterna-troll.
Shaun Patrick Mcisaac
> A pastime is something that cannot
>be considered some form of occupation. That's the difference.
>Watching TV, for example, is a pastime, not a hobby. So is shopping
>for clothes.
The national pastime, of course, isn't a pastime. Btw, you're
wrong about hobbies being employable. This is from Wordperfect 7:
Hobby:
Synonym <partial list>
Pastime
Antonym <full list>
Career
Profession
Cammy White
"Milo D. Cooper" wrote:
> What are you talking about? Professional female athletes are
> commonplace. Basketball, tennis, and various olympic sports are replete
> with female athletes, many of them household names.
Um... We're not going to make it to the pros. We're not even *trying* to become pros. I don't care HOW commonplace
female professional athletes are, a 5'6" asian girl like me is not gonna make it to the WNBA. I don't train, and I
don't care about the game that much. I just like having fun.
> This is an opinion formed over more than two decades of exposure to
> the female deportment.
Huh?
> All women must think that all arcades are dungeons, then, because
> there's ben a paucity of chicks (if any) in even the cleanest and
> best-lit arcades that I've seen.
If you could point to me one, I'd be *happy* to go. All but 1 arcade I've been to have been pretty much dungeons,
though, so I play in other places (Bowling alley, pizza place, etc. when I get a chance).
> Since you don't go to arcades often, how can you really tell how
> much or how little respect you get versus these other scrubs?
Because I go about once a week. I don't always play, sometimes I just watch. Most times when I *do* play, I get
those looks.
> Only because I've learned that it generally doesn't pay to do so.
Well, at least you've agreed with being the stubborn sexist...
> No, I'm saying that of *most* women. As I said before, the Cammy
> Whites and the Jenn Dolaris are extremely rare.
So women as a whole are the ones who are snaring and netting people? Oi...
> No, that's *not* what King Solomon (one of the wisest men ever to
> have lived) is saying. There's a comma after "the woman." He's
> making one of those evil blanket generalizations. Your convenient
> interpretation is directly contradictory to this next bit:
I don't see how it follows. Solomon was wise, yes, but he was also one of the biggest womanizers of all time. Look
it up. 700 wives. 300 concubines. If he _hasn't_ found the woman yet, I wonder who those 1,000 people are...
As for the verse, the comma serves to set aside the particular type of woman he's talking about, not to talk about
all women in general.
> Maybe. More probably, fewer than one in a thousand women are
> worth my time, as the passage indicates. By my experience, it's
> definitely looking that way.
Maybe if people like you had a more open mind they might actually be willing to come out.
--Cammy, the arguing Scrub
Cammy White
"Milo D. Cooper" wrote:
> Because the 20th century is just *so* civilized! What with kids
> making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
> your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
> effort and resistance?)
You know cave-kids and those big spiked clubs they carry around...
> Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
> neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
> of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
> themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
> individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
Except for the rare rare exception like me, right? Oi, this is starting to wear on my nerves.. Some women
will do this. Mostly the younger, less mature, women. Younger, less mature men, however, never do anything of
the sort, right? They're all perfectly fine being individualistic and never needing to go out with friends...
> No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
> occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
The thing is, I don't see it as plausible. If I play guitar because I think it's fun (and I do), it's no way
going to be my occupation. Would you consider drawing a pasttime or a hobby? I like to do that too.
> Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
> games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
> proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
That's not quite true either... there are a lot of games out there directed towards females because the game
companies KNOW that's where the next untapped market is. They're trying to make gender-friendly games like
BeatMania and Um Jammer Lammy. There is a female gaming community out there. Check out www.grrlgamer.com if
you don't believe me.
> The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
> most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
> you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
> into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
> you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
> go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
> intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
> (Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
> answer.)
I'm usually interested in only a few people. If a guy (or girl) doesn't capture my interest, I dismiss
him/her. It doesn't mean I won't go, because I might not meet that really nice girl with the great stories if
only a few people show up.
> Ask a woman what kind of music she likes. The response is
> almost always "I like all kinds." No character. No discriminating
> taste. Vapid.
I do like all kinds, except for country/western and the really heavy heavy metal. I also happen to think that
rap isn't really music, it's poetry set to a beat. Wow, I said what you did. But here's a thought... maybe
ask them *WHY*. Here's why I like it: I like Alternative music because of the interesting guitar riffs I like
to try at home. I like R&B because I enjoy hearing those Divas' great voices.
> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
And people like you telling us we're nothing doesn't exactly help along the situation now, does it? If you
want things to change (which I hope you do), maybe you should encourage instead of discourage. It's what I'm
trying to do.
--Cammy the 'Power to the women!' Scrub
Onaje Everett
"Milo D. Cooper" <mi...@milos-chalkboard.net> wrote:
> > Kenneth Schepers wrote:
> >>
> >> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
> >
my book, but maybe there's a
> > new definition i haven't heard of yet ^_~
>
> be considered some form of occupation. That's the difference.
> Watching TV, for example, is a pastime, not a hobby. So is shopping
> for clothes.
Actually, shopping for clothes is something that becomes a necessity after a
while. Granted, you don't have to do it as often as some people do it, but
you do end up needing the clothes eventually. I mean...it's not like you can
walk around without them on, legally.
Hmmm....I'll have to ask my friends what they think about this. :) Since most
of them are female, I should get some interesting answers.
Onaje Everett, just a humble lover of combos at (o_ev...@hotmail.com).
Meaning: The Sensitive One Nicknames: FreshOJ, DaJooce, The Juice
Mantra: "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me."
-Philippians 4:13
Onaje Everett
> >
> > he probably doesn't hang out with women. none will go out with him, so this
is
> > his feeble and ultimately unfair attempt to get back at them. heh, no dice
my
> > friend.
>
> *Shrug* Some women have gone out with me, some haven't. I rarely
> have any desire to go out with a woman, since 99% of them are vapid
> and needy, anyway. No character.
Whoa whoa whoa!!!
Milo, I think you mean "99% of the ones you've met". The ones *I* know have
character. Some of them have much more character than yours truly...and you
KNOW I have character. :)
> And women wonder why we seem to want nothing from them but sex! What else do
> they have to offer?
But, see....you can only control what you offer. As long as you go around
with a pessimistic attitude, thinking that women are this way, that's all
you'll see. Trust me on this 'cause I sure enough lived it.
Maybe the answer is to start from within. I know it's mine.
Onaje Everett
>
> I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding hands?
>
>
> 26: And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and
nets, and her hands as bands:
> whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her
>
> Read it. This verse isn't talking about all women as you are, it's saying
that the woman WITH SNARING AND
> NETTING HEART is something people should avoid. This isn't some blanket
statement about an entire gender. Do
> you see me as some evil internet temptress trying to snare you?
>
> I found; but a woman amnog all those have I not found
>
> Yes, girls who play games are hard to find. Maybe you're not looking in the
> right place.
I can't believe it. A Bible study...on alt.games.sf2...and *I* didn't start
it. :)
BTW, I have to agree with you, Cammy. Females that play SF are very hard to
find (I've found, like, 3...and the one that I know is married). Women (as
opposed to females...being female is natural...being a woman is a choice) are
extremely hard to find. I'd like to say, however, that I know where the real
women are at.
Can you guess where? :) :) :)
YeOldeHead
>>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>
>> Dude, this is *fucked up* statement, if for no other reason that
>> playing SF is not exactly about "thought or skill development." Yess, there
>is
>> some skill involved, but a totally arbitrary skill that is worthless
>outside
>> of SF and other video games.
>
> You're missing the big picture. Guys play video games, and chicks
>don't. This is a manifestation of the male's much greater fascination
>with and attraction to mechanical systems, and the challenges provided
>by analyzing and mastering them (which is, in turn, due to the male drive
>of individual accomplishment, as I wrote before). It's the same reason
>more guys are into cars, and sports, and computers, and chess, and
>martial tactics, etc.
> Women generally don't care about stuff like that. They are far more
>preoccupied with seeking their own self-worth through other people (as
>I wrote, they are much more social than men). Few things are more
>exciting to women than being around a bunch of other human beings (pack-
>herding); likewise, they find solitude acutely unbearable. Women
>aren't individualistic -- which is why they all seem the same.
You first address the segment (not a majority by a longshot) of men with a
fascination of "mechanical systems, and the challenges provided by analyzing
and mastering them," and then compare this segment to *all* women in general?
Yes, most women are not individualistic. Most men aren't either. People in
general are the social-herding, unindividualistic cowards you speak of, men not
being an exception. Take a walk down to a local fraternity come Friday night,
or any time for that matter, will you find this ideal of men driving for
individual accomplishment? You've come off as misanthropic in the past, and
that was alright, but misogyny (sp?) is completely irrational.
[snip]
>
>> If you want to claim that men are more interested in developing
>> thought or skill SF would *not* have been my first choice, nor would
>sitting
>> on the couch drinking beer and watching football, sitting at a bar drinking
>> beer and watching women, etc.
>
> Unlike those other things you mention, playing Street Fighter is
>an active pastime. Your comparison isn't valid; you would have made
>more sense if you had written *watching* Street Fighter instead of
>*playing* it, or playing football and dancing on stage instead of
>watching someone else do those things.
What about the arts? You do believe art, music, and writing require developing
thought or skill, don't you? You can't seriously believe that women's
involvement in such fields is minimal, or "less than a statistic." Women
participate in the arts as much, if not more than men, and many without
considering the arts as their profession.
And as a side note, how does something being viable as a career affect
anything? If a person paints for pleasure, and is also able to make a living
off of it, what changes? If SF were to suddenly become a massive industry like
basketball, and Alex Valle were to be paid like Michael Jordon, would SF cease
to become his pastime?
>
>> Video games are geared towards men, appeal to men, and are
>> traditionally male. Click on the Medic in Starcraft 2. (Or whatever it's
>> called) Play Duke Nuke'm. See any male strippers?
>
> Bull. The characters that wear the least amount of clothing in
>Street Fighter have always been male, by a longshot. Adon, Dee
>Jay, Fei Long, and Zangief are probably the best proof of this.
I can't say for sure, but I never thought of Adon, DeeJay, or Zangief as being
really very attractive to women. But even if SF were full of nothing but pretty
boys and studs, it still would be a game, like the vast majority of games
released in the US, that appealed more to the masculine drives of violence and
domination than to anything else.
>And if chicks dig cute games, then where are the waves of female
>DarkStalkers and Gem Fighter players? What's so "geared towards
>men" about chess that women are put off by it? Would more women
>be playing Tomb Raider if the hero were male? (Hell no.)
But there *are* waves of female DarkStalkers and GemFighter players--in Japan
(I don't even know how many Morrigan/Lillith cosplayers I've seen..). Is this
because the women over there are genetically superior? Doubtful (but possible
^_^ --J/K!). You mentioned Japan earlier as an exception to your argument,
however, I think it is the one place which *should* be used as an example.
It, as the Mecca of gaming, is a land where games already *are* on par with the
music and film industry, and *is* considered a national past-time. Gaming is
many times more accessible and culturally prevalent there than in the US,
female-oriented games are released all the time, and as a result there is a
very significant amount of female gaming otaku.
The fighting genre is probably one of the best examples of your ideal of skill
and strategy, however, it is a genre, by its own nature, largely exclusive to
males. As previously mentioned in this thread, Tetris, Puzzle Fighter and the
like are quite popular among women there (and abroad), and do very much require
the thought and skill which you seem to think is exclusive to men. Dance rhythm
games are massively popular among both genders there, and again, require the
development of skills and a high degree of mental concentration, and have some
of the competitive spirit of the fighting genre as well. However, I believe
there simply hasn't been a genre made yet which can appeal to women at large
and can foster the same kind of vigorous and intensive competition the fighting
genre has.
While here in the US (despite rising market health), gaming is still very much
perceived as a fringe hobby (take note of the many, many opinions spewed forth
by newscasters and clueless Joes regarding video games and the Colorado
incident) chock full of nothing but male adolescent fantasies of darkness,
violence and gore (superficially true). Obviously here there is little
incentive for a woman to not only venture into a male dominated hobby, but a
_fringe_ male dominated hobby at that.
-Steve
> Get yourself a clue, head man.
aisms...@my-dejanews.com
>
> Suck it up. Those are the same looks you get playing magic in
> view of non-gamers. Those are the same looks you get even talking about
> D&D, or any other RPG (sans FFVII), because "they're the same thing
> really." Well they have about as much in common as Schindler's list and
> Terminator 2 but yah, "they're the same thing."
Or talking about videogames in almost ANY public place that is not an arcade.
My boyfriend and I and some of our (male) friends were at a coffee house
discussing SFA3 strategies etc., and ppl were giving us looks like we were
discussing baby-poisoning strategies or something. ^_^ That wide-eyed "WHAT
are you talking about?!" look.
>
> And don't even think about anything anime related. Then you're a
> pervert in addition to a socialital outcast.
>
So true. See above story. Replace 'SFA3' with 'Anime'. It never fails, and
when we debate stuff loudly it's worse. Never mind that plenty of ppl are
sitting around debating politics, etc. We're looked at like freaks...oh well.
It's more fun than debating politics any day, and not as likely to ruin
friendships either.
Sakura-chan
Female gamer & Anime fan (horrors! ^_^ )
aisms...@my-dejanews.com
>
> 1. Arcades are usually dismal places, without good ventilation or lighting,
and usually dirty (due to
> snack food or whatever on the floor and stuff). I don't think I've ever seen a
full-fledged arcade with
> windows. Make them brighter, clean them up, maybe I'd go more often. That is,
IF...
so true
>
> 2. Many guys I've met have looked down on me with a haughty 'You're inferior
to me because you're
> female' attitude. They don't treat me with respect. People let me win because
they're surprised I'm a
> girl. Then they're surprised when I am actually pulling off combos on them...
playing some mind games
> etc. I'm not a great player. I'm not even a *good* player. I'm a scrub, but
I'd like to practice, and
> I'd like to play against someone who wants to play against me, but if people
don't treat me with
> respect, I will take myself elsewhere.
This has been my experience as well. especially as the g/f of a gamer. guyz
do not take me seriously. when i first came onto #capcom, i had to deal with
guyz telling me that if i was cute, then i obviously couldn't play, and if i
COULD play, then i must be a troll. I could not believe the attitude i got.
And to add to what Cammy says, when a girl does go into an arcade, play a
guy, and beat him a few times, then we have to deal with their "i can't
believe i was beaten by a girl" attitude which can be comprised of many
comments, some of my favorite being: "Oh, girls just mash on the buttons,
that's why she won" or " i was just going easy on you" Ok, you were going
easy on me for 5 matches? I think not ^_^
There are some of us out there who do enjoy playing, but it's a shame that the
few of us, such as Cammy and myself, end up on opposite coasts.
Sakura-chan
James Margaris
>> James Margaris wrote:
>>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
> You're missing the big picture. Guys play video games, and chicks
>don't. This is a manifestation of the male's much greater fascination
>with and attraction to mechanical systems, and the challenges provided
>by analyzing and mastering them (which is, in turn, due to the male drive
>of individual accomplishment, as I wrote before). It's the same reason
>more guys are into cars, and sports, and computers, and chess, and
>martial tactics, etc.
So, men like gadgets, and men like competition. That means that women
are less individual and less motivated? How many men "analyze and master" the
things they are involved in? Not very many.
Women are more social, hence they don't like computers as much, as
computing is a solitary activity. Similar with working on a car. Sports and
mertial arts obviously are competitive and violent, something that appeals
more to men, and women (avg woman vs avg man) simply cannot be as good at
them, due to the physical requirements.
What about women who take dance, ballet, or voice lessons? All the
women who practice art, write, play muscial instruments? I would guess that
women greatly outnumber men in these categories. Does that prove anything? Not
really. But clearly, all of these things are as much about self improvment and
mastery (more so, IMO) than tinkering with a car. I suppose a difference is
that you can't sit down at a table and "beat" someone at Violin the way you
can Chess, but does that matter?
[clip]
Few things are more
>exciting to women than being around a bunch of other human beings (pack-
>herding); likewise, they find solitude acutely unbearable. Women
>aren't individualistic -- which is why they all seem the same.
Women tend to more more social. This does not make them less
individualistic. Anyone who spends a lot of time with other people learns to
get along. In private they may have plenty of opinions and individuality, but
in public women are likely to oil the wheels by not being argumentative. If
they all "seem the same" you need to get to know some on more than the base
superficial level. And, if women tend to understate their opinions, men
overstate them are seek conflict just as much.
[clip]
>> Please don't claim that playing SF build intelligence or valuable
>> reflexes or whatever. Playing SF is fun. It's a hobby. It needs no other
>> justification.
>
> It builds intelligence and reflexes necessary to become better
>at the artificial mechanical system known as Street Fighter.
Watching women can be active. Drinking beer is an activity. Whether or
not these are "active pasttimes" is irrelevant. The point is that men engage
in many of these types of behavior, and they sure as hell aren'e self improvin
g.
>> If you want to claim that men are more interested in developing
>> thought or skill SF would *not* have been my first choice, nor would sitting
>> on the couch drinking beer and watching football, sitting at a bar drinking
>> beer and watching women, etc.
>
> Unlike those other things you mention, playing Street Fighter is
>an active pastime. Your comparison isn't valid; you would have made
>more sense if you had written *watching* Street Fighter instead of
>*playing* it, or playing football and dancing on stage instead of
>watching someone else do those things.
Watching women can be active. Drinking beer is an activity. Whether or
not these are "active pasttimes" is irrelevant. The point is that men engage
in many of these types of behavior, and they sure as hell aren'e self
improving.
>
>> Video games are geared towards men, appeal to men, and are
>> traditionally male. Click on the Medic in Starcraft 2. (Or whatever it's
>> called) Play Duke Nuke'm. See any male strippers?
>
> Bull. The characters that wear the least amount of clothing in
>Street Fighter have always been male, by a longshot. Adon, Dee
>Jay, Fei Long, and Zangief are probably the best proof of this.
>And if chicks dig cute games, then where are the waves of female
>DarkStalkers and Gem Fighter players? What's so "geared towards
>men" about chess that women are put off by it? Would more women
>be playing Tomb Raider if the hero were male? (Hell no.)
Yeah, Adon wearing shorts (something real people fight in) is worse
than panty shots of a 16 year old in a school-girl outfit or special breast
animation for Psylocke, Mai Shiranu and all of DOA. See, men really do fight
in just pants or shorts. Women, on the other hand, do not usually fight in
swim suits, high heels, school uniforms, loose skirts, miniskirts, or anything
else.
Do you really want to deny that video games are aimed at men. Even
though video game makers admit that that is their target audience? Anyone in
video games will admit it. Dating simulation anyone? Duke aimed at women as
much as men? Shoot and kill strippers, I know *lots* of girls who get turned
on by that.
You've managed to pick out one example, oversimplified it rediculously
(appeal = how much clothing they are wearing), and ignored every shred of
evidence or common sense. You might also think that women are less turned on
by men's bodies in general, in which case the way to attract women is not just
to have naked guys.
Where are the women playing Puzzle Fighter? Well, around here girls
don't get a special announcement in the mail telling them what puzzle fighter
is. If girls don't go to arcades they won't even see Puzzle Fighter of Gem
whatever the fuck, just like I would never see SF4 if it was located in the
feminine products aisle.
That being said, these days I see *many* more girls in arcades than I
did 10 years ago, mostly playing either machines (not games, but the cheesy
raffle ticket things) or one of the large "family entertainment" games like
skiing or whatever. Actually around here the ration of guys to girls in about
7-3, which is a lot higher than the 9.9 - .1 it used to be.
As for Chess, give it up. Chess has become the ultimate
pseudo-intellectual ploy. "look at me, I play Chess, I must be smart."
Honestly, Chess is not a very fun game. Chess is also seen as a male domain,
which prevents some women from playing, in the same way that men are less
likely to be figure skaters or ballet people, even though there is nothing
inherent in figure skating or ballet that makes it a female activity. Does
this mean that women who like Chess but don't play because of the tradition of
male chess players are gutless? No more so than the men who won't learn how to
sew.
And finally, you distinction between hobby, past-time, etc, is a crock
of shit. Let me get this straight. If I do something for fun that could
somehow be work related, it is not a pastime?
So, if I sing in a band for fun, because of the .0001% chance that I
could get a record deal it's not a valid pastime? What if the top SF player
could make a living off of it? Then all those other SF players wouldn't be
engaging in a pasttime anymore because it could lead to a "job." WTF?
So, a pasttime must have ZERO relevance to anything in life.
Wonderful.Why would we prefer a pasttime to a hobby, which has some relvance
AND is done for fun? Sounds strictly better to me.
Pastime = hobby = something you do because you enjoy it.
James M
Knight of the Black Rose
>
> >
> > 1. Arcades are usually dismal places, without good ventilation or lighting,
> and usually dirty (due to
> > snack food or whatever on the floor and stuff). I don't think I've ever seen a
> full-fledged arcade with
> > windows. Make them brighter, clean them up, maybe I'd go more often. That is,
> IF...
Arcades are noisy.
They can be crowded.
Thus, you may have to wait to play the game you want.
They can get expensive.
You meeting annoying jerks.
One good point: the games (sometimes).
Is it any wonder that many people prefer home consoles?
This could explain why you don't find many women in arcades as well as
why you don't find a great deal of men in arcades.
Now that I have a console system, I don't bother with the arcades except
very rarely.
When I was in Japan briefly, I sure splurged on the arcades (Vampire
Savior!).
There are enough games to occupy someone at home while waiting for the
arcade conversion.
> This has been my experience as well. especially as the g/f of a gamer. guyz
> do not take me seriously. when i first came onto #capcom, i had to deal with
> guyz telling me that if i was cute, then i obviously couldn't play, and if i
> COULD play, then i must be a troll. I could not believe the attitude i got.
> And to add to what Cammy says, when a girl does go into an arcade, play a
> guy, and beat him a few times, then we have to deal with their "i can't
> believe i was beaten by a girl" attitude which can be comprised of many
> comments, some of my favorite being:
Frankly, a girl who can beat me at a videogame is more attractive to me.
I'm glad I've found one who can. I just hope she gets good at SFA3
because I have a feeling I'll play it a lot.
Knight
Kenneth Schepers
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr. wrote:
> Milo D. Cooper wrote in message <3724C5A5...@milos-chalkboard.net>...
> > *snip*
>
> You know what? Fuck you. You're a worthless human being if these are your beliefs. Women are more cowardly than men? Explain
> the eons of oppression they endured at the hands of men. Examples? Foot binding, excision and witch hunting come to mind. Who's
> fooling who? Men have a very low tolerance for pain. Who's a fucking coward?
>
> Shoot yourself now and stop polluting the gene pool with your underdeveloped DNA.
alright, maybe this has gone far enough. if we can't have a rational debate about this (i.e. no name calling), then it's probably
time to drop it. i don't agree with milo, but we don't need to call him names.
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Kenneth Schepers
> a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit with the
> ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
refresh my memory, what exactly _did_ she do? and i can't believe someone
brought titanic into this....
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Kenneth Schepers
> could be considered a job. Athleticism and community service can lead
> directly to occupation. Playing Street Fighter cannot.
actually you might be hired as a game tester. they play games for a living, right? and what about people
who review games for magazines? sure, they write, but they also _have_ to play the games.
> So what? That's how bland women are. Most every guy here will
> acknowledge this (though not in public).
*shakes his head* wow...that's just so much bs. you're on your own there.
> As you should. You yourself claim that you aren't good, though,
> so why *should* guys respect you as a SF player? I know that *I*
> wouldn't.
maybe the fact that she is a relative minority here with an honest desire to get better at a hobby? i know i
respect her for it.
> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
and now the bible! *lol* this is getting ludricious...
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Kenneth Schepers
> be considered some form of occupation. That's the difference.
> Watching TV, for example, is a pastime, not a hobby. So is shopping
> for clothes.
actually, people do things like that all the time in some jobs.
> When there's no need to take it into consideration where financial
> gain is concerned.
all to true, but that doesn't mean you should ignore them.
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Kenneth Schepers
i seriously doubt he wants to find such a woman. then he'd know he's wrong.
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
<ksch...@socket.net> wrote:
> alright, maybe this has gone far enough. if we can't have a rational debate about this (i.e. no name calling), then it's probably
>time to drop it. i don't agree with milo, but we don't need to call him names.
A rational debate about whether or not females are inferior? I'm
sorry, I refuse to engage in such a debate or consort with people who
do. It's already a moot point - they are equal. Or whatever. I
already have Milo in my killfile anyway, so end of debate on this
side.
Kenneth Schepers
> Because the 20th century is just *so* civilized! What with kids
> making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
> your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
> effort and resistance?)
not only sexist, but insensitive to boot! i know i tried to refrain from name-calling, but i can't let this
slide.
> Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
> neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
> of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
> themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
> individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
face it, men _and_ women are a gregarious species. are you trying to say men don't get together for fun?
> No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
> occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
ok, you asked for it. *whips out a dictionary* hobby: a pursuit or or interest engaged in for relaxation.
pastime: DIVERSION, RECREATION. when's this work stuff come into it?
> Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
> games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
> proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
chicks and dudes......what are you, a 18th century cowboy?
> The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
> most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
> you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
> into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
> you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
> go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
> intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
> (Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
> answer.)
did you just say you know what women think? *lmao*
> Anyone who has a bunch of friends is either an opportunist, or
> a sad black hole of dependency on other human beings for his/her
> own livelihood.
or a friendly person? nah...
> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
i'd just like to point out the obvious and say, this guy is a minority among men. thank you.
> Seen Kubrick's _Barry Lyndon_? That movie depicts the very *essence*
> of the aggregate of womanhood. Watch and learn.
i'd say you've dug yourself a pretty deep hole....maybe you should quit while you're behind.
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Kenneth Schepers
> profitable than the movie industry -- if you doubt this, see
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,319870,00.html or
> a professional in the business, for almost ten years, now, and
> it's a fact. And as we all know, the video game industry is
> *overwhelmingly* supported by the male consumer. If you can't
> figure out what this means, here's a hint: the movie industry,
> which caters to both sexes roughly equally, has met its match
> themselves. Men *do* "play video
> games to any great degree" -- very much so, enough to place
> video games over movies with comparatively no support from the
> female population.
> I know WtF I'm talking about. Drop the politically correct
> "women and men are equal" crap; nothing could be further from
> the truth. Men and women are *extremely* dissimilar, and no
> one should have to have this explained to him/her. It's obvious.
it's true that women and men are different. it's not true that they're weak.
> *What* do they read? People magazine. Stephen King novels.
i'm a man, i enjoy stephen king, and i'll bet i'm far from alone there.
> Women Are From Venus. Opera Winfrey Book Club selections. Pop
> culture literary junkfood. Also, reading and analyzing are two
> different things; the former really doesn't take any significant
> effort or skill, and doesn't automatically lead to improvement
> in the latter.
so now you're going to bitch about how their reading skills too? maybe you
should check the stats on illiteracy between men and women.
> People who prefer to be pursued are passive. They tend to
> make little or no effort toward achieving what they want. They
> sit on their @$$es, waiting for life to happen to them, then
> they whine about oppression and other b.s. when they find
> themselves running in last place when the finish line is in
> sight.
> Because chicks tend to seek the establishment of their self-
> worth through the approbation of someone else, rather than by
> their own individuality, they fear rejection by other people
> (especially men, whom they recognize as highly individualistic)
> more than just about anything. As a result, they're afraid to
> make themselves vulnerable, and instead prefer to be pursued.
> Women loved _Titanic_ because it represented exactly what they
> want in life: to be able to sit on their butts (as Rose, the
> Kate Winslet character, did) and have a dashing pretty boy
> come and tell them how wonderful they are, and fall in love
> with them, and have sex in cool places. It also helped very
> much that Kate Winslet was a little chubby (as Hollywood
> actresses go -- she's still much better looking than your
> average woman), so all the out-of-shape women out there could
> go, "I'm fat, so I can get Leonardo too!" So much for the
> death of chivalry and fairy tale princes.
> I think you asked that question because you're curious, and
> you sense the truth in what I say, and you wanted the answer to
> a question that has been nagging you for years. Well, you have
> your answer. What you do with it now is up to you.
> ... Because the female reaction to it was that strong, and
> because most people have seen the movie, which makes reference
> to it very convenient.
_to_ convienent.
> > - there is no need to repeat yourself endlessly. I assume your view
> > of women is based on more than just your observations about Titanic?
>
> Of course.
and you don't see anything wrong with that?
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
Stuart White
:> Women like to be pursued. Figure it out. I have. If you need
:> a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit with the
:> ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
:
: refresh my memory, what exactly _did_ she do? and i can't believe someone
: brought titanic into this....
*groan*
Dude, read it on dejanews. Try:
http://www.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/dnquery.xp?ST=PS&QRY=titanic&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1&format=terse&showsort=score&maxhits=25&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=&authors=milo%40milos-chalkboard.net&fromdate=&todate=
http://x5.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/viewthread.xp?AN=365408922.1&search=thread&svcclass=dnserver&ST=PS&CONTEXT=925256288.901840918&HIT_CONTEXT=925256288.901840918&HIT_NUM=10&recnum=%3c35900B3...@milos-chalkboard.net%3e%231/2&frpage=getdoc.xp&back=cla
rinet
IIRC, Milo had some stuff on his homepage about it too.
Something of a pet subject, I gather. Please don't goad him into
re-stating his analysis *again*. Read it on dejanews and spare us the
torment. ^_^
Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr.
<o_ev...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> The Bible is a crock anyway.
>No...it isn't. :) Trust me.
I know..... I was just in a REALLY bad mood when I wrote that. The
Bible is misinterpreted all the time. Priests use it to prove
everything from dancing is bad to girls are inferior. So that's why I
said that. It's not the Bible that is a crock, it's the people who
misinterpret it. People like Mr. Milo Cooper.
Kenneth Schepers
>
> Dude, read it on dejanews
sorry, my bad! and i don't think i wanna read it now....
Eric Schepers: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/4052
elizabeth & chris
So, are you guys all making broad generalizations
or are you making generalizations about broads?
P.S. My wife could kick a$$ at Gyruss when I met her.
Dark Schneider
> making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
> your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
> effort and resistance?)
So.... a few "individualistic", antisocial children killing people means that the 20th century isn't
civilized? I'm talking about equality: women's lib, the civil rights movement. Granted, there are still
plenty of cavemen (read: drunken frat boys and ignorant religious nuts) who think women are second class
citizens, but the vast majority of us have realized that a woman can do anything a man can do... sometimes
better.
> Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
> neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
> of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
> themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
> individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
You're just flat-out wrong, Milo. If you're talking about 14-17 year old "girls", then yes, many of them
are needy and clique-prone. Adolescence nearly requires it to survive. However, the vast majority of "women"
in the world don't need that breed of validation. Just look at marriage statistics: Over the past twenty
years, women have increasingly become the instigator for divorce and the percentage of unmarried women has
consistently gone up. Women needing men was a social pressure placed on them, not something inherent in their
genetic makeup.
> >> Those aren't pastimes, those are hobbies or vocations.
> >
> > Synonyms.
>
> No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
> occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
Look it up in any thesaurus. They're synonyms.
> Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
> games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
> proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
Don't use "chicks". It's degrading. As for your point, why can't a woman be just as into gaming as a guy?
Just because there's far fewer of them doesn't make the ones that ARE into it any less hardcore.
> The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
> most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
> you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
> into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
> you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
> go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
> intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
> (Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
> answer.)
I see. You're talking about BIG groups of people. That's a high school thing. Teenagers (especially
girls) have horrible self-worth problems and make these huge groups of friends for therapeutic
self-assurance. However, puberty only lasts so long.... ask any woman over the age of 20 how many close
friends she has.... the majority will rarely say more than 5.
> Anyone who has a bunch of friends is either an opportunist, or
> a sad black hole of dependency on other human beings for his/her
> own livelihood. In the latter case, this person exhibits just the
> kind of excessive tolerance and lack of discriminating taste that
> one would reasonably expect from someone with no character.
I myself am fairly antisocial and tend to agree with this statement. However, saying that all women are
this way is an incredibly ignorant generalization.
> Ask a woman what kind of music she likes. The response is
> almost always "I like all kinds." No character. No discriminating
> taste. Vapid.
Wrong. People can like all different kinds of music for any reason. I myself have a wide variance of
tastes, most relating to my mood. Things like Tool + Incubus for my times of anger and self-doubt. Radiohead
for depression/thought provocation. Classical + Nobuo U. for my happier days.
> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
Wrong. Individualism makes one cold-hearted and arrogant. A healthy balance of ambition (individualism)
and altruism is where it's at.
This whole thing reeks of bitterness. I would even go as far to say that someone's had some rough
experiences with the fairer sex. You simply can't be this condescending and ignorant without either being
stupid or bitter. (And I'd like to think you're not a stupid person, Milo)
> Seen Kubrick's _Barry Lyndon_? That movie depicts the very *essence*
> of the aggregate of womanhood. Watch and learn.
I disagree. I don't think it's a social commentary... more of a caricature.
--
Dark Schneider
"Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and
I'm not sure of the former." - Einstein
"I have to lie in the middle of the floor
Completely motionless not daring to breathe."
I am like this when the police finally find me."
"Follow your bliss." - Campbell
Dark Schneider
>
> Men were made as initiators and hunters. Women were made as providers and
> care-givers. It's in the Word. Read both books of Corinthians (lots of good
> stuff in there).
>
> Now, granted, some men are naturally good at being providers and some women
> are naturally good at being initiators, but, in the end, my initial statement
> is how we were designed to be. It then becomes a matter of what we do with
> it.
<bite tongue> I'm only leaving this alone because it could turn an off-topic
rantfest into a full-scale riot. <bite bleeding tongue> Suffice to say opinions
are just that.
Ultima
[snip Relgious bits]
> <bite tongue> I'm only leaving this alone because it could turn an off-topic rantfest into a full-scale riot. <bite bleeding tongue> Suffice to say opinions are just that.
Agreed. Two things my father told me NEVER to get into an argument over:
Politics and Religion. I think any discussion about the sexes falls
somewhere between the two ^_^
--
Ultima - The Right Arm of Scrub Voltron
http://members.xoom.com/Ultima1 - The Street Fighter RPG Manifesto!
http://members.xoom.com/ShinUltima - U's Ultimate Rambling Page
If an arcade doesn't have a version of SF or SS in it, then it's not an
arcade
Milo D. Cooper
>> Cammy White wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> As for the verse, the comma serves to set aside the particular type of woman
>> he's talking about, not to talk about all women in general.
>
> there were WAY more than 1,000 women on the planet at that time. It was a
> survey...and we should all know that surveys of a portion of a population
> generally aren't an accurate reflection of the whole population.
The 1:1000 ratio is a statement of odds, not actual figures. He found
one good man out of a thousand, and zero good women out of a thousand.
Obviously, that doesn't mean that there are no good women (there are, I've
met almost all six or seven of them), but it *does* mean that they're
pretty damned scarce, enough that Solomon met 1,000 of them and was
impressed with none of them. That so many women were willing to put up
with his sexual indulgences with other women is just more proof that nearly
all chicks are passive, unambitious little cowards.
Milo D. Cooper
>
>> It's what you do when you're doing something that isn't your job, but
>> could be considered a job. Athleticism and community service can lead
>> directly to occupation. Playing Street Fighter cannot.
>
> actually you might be hired as a game tester. they play games for a living, right? and what about people
> who review games for magazines? sure, they write, but they also _have_ to play the games.
If you consider those occupations of significant sustenance and
longevity, then sure, you've got a point. I don't consider them
as such, though, just as I wouldn't call a love of eating hamburgers
a hobby because it might lead to a McJob.
>> So what? That's how bland women are. Most every guy here will
>> acknowledge this (though not in public).
>
> *shakes his head* wow...that's just so much bs. you're on your own there.
>
>> As you should. You yourself claim that you aren't good, though,
>> so why *should* guys respect you as a SF player? I know that *I*
>> wouldn't.
>
> maybe the fact that she is a relative minority here with an honest desire to get better at a hobby? i know i
> respect her for it.
Nevertheless, you aren't respecting her as a SF player. If she
sucks, she sucks, and she can't reasonably expect people to pretend
otherwise.
>> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
>
> and now the bible! *lol* this is getting ludricious...
Why? Her statement that she believes in God makes Biblical
reference an ideal retort.
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Because the 20th century is just *so* civilized! What with kids
>> making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
>> your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
>> effort and resistance?)
>
> slide.
Even if it's an unjustified remark, apparently. What was insensitive
about what I wrote? What am I, a chick?
>> Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
>> neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
>> of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
>> themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
>> individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
>
> face it, men _and_ women are a gregarious species. are you trying to say men don't get together for fun?
No, I'm saying that men don't depend on congregation for the
development of their self-worth.
>> No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
>> occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
>
> ok, you asked for it. *whips out a dictionary* hobby: a pursuit or or interest engaged in for relaxation.
> pastime: DIVERSION, RECREATION. when's this work stuff come into it?
Hobby = pursuit. (There's that word again.) In other words,
hobbies require active participation. Pastime = diversion. A
diversion is something which entertains, hence, the activity occurs
on the part of the entity providing the diversion, *not* the
entity being entertained. This should be obvious by the very
make-up of the word ("pass time," from the French "passe temps").
>> Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
>> games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
>> proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
>
> chicks and dudes......what are you, a 18th century cowboy?
I bet that was supposed to be funny.
>> The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
>> most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
>> you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
>> into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
>> you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
>> go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
>> intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
>> (Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
>> answer.)
>
> did you just say you know what women think? *lmao*
What did I, make some typographical errors? Yep, that's what I
wrote.
>> Anyone who has a bunch of friends is either an opportunist, or
>> a sad black hole of dependency on other human beings for his/her
>> own livelihood.
>
> or a friendly person? nah...
There are different kinds of friendliness. I'm ultra friendly to
people who I think are worth more than a crap. Anyone who tends to
get along with everyone has his/her head in either a very high place,
or a very dark place. The world would be a much better place if
people were as intriguing and possessing of character as all that.
>> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
>> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
>
> i'd just like to point out the obvious and say, this guy is a minority among men. thank you.
>
>> Seen Kubrick's _Barry Lyndon_? That movie depicts the very *essence*
>> of the aggregate of womanhood. Watch and learn.
>
> i'd say you've dug yourself a pretty deep hole....maybe you should quit while you're behind.
The thing about holes is, if you keep increasing their size,
people eventually fall into them.
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> almost always "I like all kinds." No character. No discriminating
>> taste. Vapid.
>
> listen to it), Milo. Am I vapid...or am I just a guy that likes variety?
> Remember, I'm the same person that not only tries his best to master all the
> characters of a game, but that I'm also the one that can hang when it comes to
> deep discussion.
>
> See, the answer is "All kinds" usually when they're too afraid to be
> themselves around you because they desperately want you to like them.
Precisely my point! No character. No individuality. Cowards.
I'd rather meet a strong woman who disagreed with everything that
I said, rather than some namby-pamby little girl with no personality,
afraid to be herself (what little self she has) -- and you can't
*have* a self unless you're willing to give up needing to be around
*other people* long enough to develop one.
> Unfortunately, I've been around those kinds of girls (this was in high
> school, afterall) and I was too naive...then. Now, I do know females that
> like all kinds of music...but do you know why they say it? Because it's
> true.
Is that supposed to be laudable? I'd be infinitely more impressed
with a woman who liked a single type of music over a woman who evinced
spreading her attention thinly by taking in some of everything.
> :) People that aren't afraid to be real with you DO exist. I know
> quite a few.
So do I. About two of them are women, the rest are men.
>> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
>> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
>
> I second that. For real, though. It shouldn't matter what others think.
> It's often too bad that it does. There's only one person's opinion I
> ultimately care about...but that's because that opinion is always fact.
Ditto.
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> making swiss cheese of their high schools, and all! (How many of
>> your caveman children could kill thirteen people with such little
>> effort and resistance?)
>
> So.... a few "individualistic", antisocial children killing people means that the 20th century isn't
> civilized? I'm talking about equality: women's lib, the civil rights movement. Granted, there are still
> plenty of cavemen (read: drunken frat boys and ignorant religious nuts) who think women are second class
> citizens, but the vast majority of us have realized that a woman can do anything a man can do... sometimes
> better.
The problem is that 99% of them don't exercise that potential.
>> Maybe they strive for excellence for a little while. Then that
>> neediness and lonliness kicks in (both of which are essential phases
>> of self-improvement), and they're back to seeking to fulfill
>> themselves through other individuals, or, more likely, groups of
>> individuals. Herding with those packs. Round 'em up!
>
> You're just flat-out wrong, Milo. If you're talking about 14-17 year old "girls", then yes, many of them
> are needy and clique-prone. Adolescence nearly requires it to survive. However, the vast majority of "women"
> in the world don't need that breed of validation. Just look at marriage statistics: Over the past twenty
> years, women have increasingly become the instigator for divorce and the percentage of unmarried women has
> consistently gone up. Women needing men was a social pressure placed on them, not something inherent in their
> genetic makeup.
Yeah, once they realize (too late) that their fairy tale b.s. about
becoming better people simply by bagging a man is a bust, they pull
out.
>> No. Pastime = no kind of occupation. Hobby = can be considered an
>> occupation. Example? Pastime: nightclubbing. Hobby: playing guitar.
>
> Look it up in any thesaurus. They're synonyms.
Which doesn't mean that they mean the same thing. Which they
don't. They're synonyms in that they designate extra-occupational
events, but the similarities end there. One signifies active
participation, the other, passive.
>> Nope, that's not my point. My point is that so few chicks play
>> games that there's no point in attempting to offer otherwise as
>> proof that chicks can be just as much into gaming as us dudes.
>
> Don't use "chicks". It's degrading. As for your point, why can't a woman be just as into gaming as a guy?
Because women are less analytical, and thereby less often attracted
to mechanical systems. (And, for the stupids out there -- i.e. 99% of
you -- "mechanical" doesn't mean "cars and computers.") Women dig
social stuff, instead. That's where they feel most alive, feeding off
the vibes of other people, like personality vampires with no real
blood of their own.
> Just because there's far fewer of them doesn't make the ones that ARE into it any less hardcore.
It *does* make them *aberrations* though, doesn't it?
>> The problem with having a big-ass circle of friends is that
>> most people aren't remarkable enough to accommodate that -- *unless*
>> you're a needy socialite. Think about it: the more people you put
>> into a room together, the smaller the ratio of people who interest
>> you to people for whom you couldn't possibly care less. When you
>> go to a party, or some such involving truckloads of folk, are you
>> intrigued by most of the people that you meet, or an extreme few?
>> (Ladies: don't bother answering the question, I already know your
>> answer.)
>
> I see. You're talking about BIG groups of people. That's a high school thing. Teenagers (especially
> girls) have horrible self-worth problems and make these huge groups of friends for therapeutic
> self-assurance. However, puberty only lasts so long.... ask any woman over the age of 20 how many close
> friends she has.... the majority will rarely say more than 5.
Bullsh*t. If I were talking of high school, then I'd have said so.
Show me a woman who says she has five friends, and I'll show you a
brazen liar.
>> Anyone who has a bunch of friends is either an opportunist, or
>> a sad black hole of dependency on other human beings for his/her
>> own livelihood. In the latter case, this person exhibits just the
>> kind of excessive tolerance and lack of discriminating taste that
>> one would reasonably expect from someone with no character.
>
> I myself am fairly antisocial and tend to agree with this statement. However, saying that all women are
> this way is an incredibly ignorant generalization.
It is if you've got a death grip on political correctness.
>> Ask a woman what kind of music she likes. The response is
>> almost always "I like all kinds." No character. No discriminating
>> taste. Vapid.
>
> Wrong. People can like all different kinds of music for any reason. I myself have a wide variance of
> tastes, most relating to my mood. Things like Tool + Incubus for my times of anger and self-doubt. Radiohead
> for depression/thought provocation. Classical + Nobuo U. for my happier days.
Then *you* suck, too. Anyone with a *real* appreciation for music
won't need different genres of the art for his/her different moods --
most any type of music is capable of expressing the full spectrum of
human emotion.
>> And you know what? Women *will* be second best as long as they
>> shun individualism in favor of pack-herding and neediness.
>
> Wrong. Individualism makes one cold-hearted and arrogant. A healthy balance of ambition (individualism)
> and altruism is where it's at.
What does that have to do with what I wrote?
> This whole thing reeks of bitterness. I would even go as far to say that someone's had some rough
> experiences with the fairer sex. You simply can't be this condescending and ignorant without either being
> stupid or bitter. (And I'd like to think you're not a stupid person, Milo)
Of course I'm bitter. Anyone who meets with disillusion is going
to become bitter. I used to think that women were the sh*t -- but
they've taught me otherwise these many years past.
>> Seen Kubrick's _Barry Lyndon_? That movie depicts the very *essence*
>> of the aggregate of womanhood. Watch and learn.
>
> I disagree. I don't think it's a social commentary... more of a caricature.
Synonyms.
Milo D. Cooper
>> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>>
>> profitable than the movie industry -- if you doubt this, see
>> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,319870,00.html or
>> http://eola.cs.ucf.edu/csdept/colloq/96-97/96-10-25.html.
>
> movies than play video games.
... Which says nothing whatever about the popularity of video games,
aside from the fact that movies are (ostensibly) more popular.
> <About the reference - it is a year out of date and merely contains
> speculation that games *may* outstrip movies for 1998 - was this actually
> the case?
Yes.
> I couldn't find any hard figures, but I didn't have time to
> look thoroughly. Do you have a reference for a better source? Cheers.>
http://www.next-generation.com/jsmid/news/5460.html
http://www.gamasutra.com/newswire/industry_analysis/hard_bytes/19980612a.htm
(Note in particular the "fastest growing segment" text in the first
paragraph.)
> Sure. I am not disputing that video games players are almost exclusively
> male. I am disputing the fact that males are almost exclusively video
> games players.
Whether they are is irrelevant. It's what that *signifies* that
counts.
> And if they are not all playing video games, what are they doing in their
> free-time that is so mentally challenging?
Any of a number of things that require active participation, but
that don't require pack-herding. Programming, tinkering, construction,
repair, upgrading, analytical discussion (how many men vs. women do you
see on Usenet?), composition, etc.
>> The statistics speak for themselves. Men *do* "play video
>> games to any great degree" -- very much so, enough to place
>> video games over movies with comparatively no support from the
>> female population.
>
> As I said, that is only in terms of profit.
What other objective terms are you considering?
>> I know WtF I'm talking about. Drop the politically correct
>> "women and men are equal" crap;
>
> My belief is not based on political correctness - it is based on personal
> experience.
>
>> Men and women are *extremely* dissimilar, and no
>> one should have to have this explained to him/her. It's obvious.
>
> I know that men and women are dissimilar. But dissimilar does not imply
> unequal.
With respect to character -- which is what you and I are discussing,
not merit -- that's *exactly* what it implies.
>> *What* do they read? People magazine. Stephen King novels.
>> Women Are From Venus. Opera Winfrey Book Club selections. Pop
>> culture literary junkfood. Also, reading and analyzing are two
>> different things; the former really doesn't take any significant
>> effort or skill, and doesn't automatically lead to improvement
>> in the latter.
>
> I doubt that many games that guys play take much significantly more effort
> or skill than literary junkfood.
Picking up a book and reading it (as opposed to analyzing it,
which requires intense active participation) is a cinch. It takes
a lot more effort to learn the arbitrary rules of an aritfical
mechanical system, and become skilled in functioning within them.
> There are exceptions, some games are more
> challenging and require some skill - but there are also books that require
> more effort both to read and to appreciate, even if the woman does not
> analyse the book in any depth.
It's impossible to appreciate literature when it isn't analyzed
at all.
>> [...]
>> People who prefer to be pursued are passive. They tend to
>> make little or no effort toward achieving what they want. They
>> sit on their @$$es, waiting for life to happen to them, then
>> they whine about oppression and other b.s. when they find
>> themselves running in last place when the finish line is in
>> sight.
>> Because chicks tend to seek the establishment of their self-
>> worth through the approbation of someone else,rather than by
>> their own individuality, they fear rejection by other people
>> (especially men, whom they recognize as highly individualistic)
>> more than just about anything. As a result, they're afraid to
>> make themselves vulnerable, and instead prefer to be pursued.
>
> I do not agree that women seek to establish their worth through aquiring a
> partner. I think that this may be true for some women, but not for the
> majority in my experience.
So?
> I would also say that I do not think all (or indeed most) men are
> extremely individualistic. The pack mentality is as strong in men as it is
> in women, and many men will not fly in the face of popular opinion because
> they fear rejection. We *all* seek approval subconsciously, to some
> degree, regardless of gender.
So?
Onaje Everett
"Ricardo A Lafaurie Jr." <das...@cyberspace.org> wrote:
> Cammy White wrote in message <372566A5...@grommit.com>...
> >> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
>
> The Bible is a crock anyway.
No...it isn't. :) Trust me.
It's only a crock when you read it wrong. You'll find it's perfectly true
when you live it.
Of course, that's only my opinion and I have nothing but 7 years of blessings
and growth to show for it. *shrug* C'est la vie.
Onaje Everett, just a humble lover of combos at (o_ev...@hotmail.com).
Meaning: The Sensitive One Nicknames: FreshOJ, DaJooce, The Juice
Mantra: "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me."
-Philippians 4:13
Onaje Everett
> >> Milo D. Cooper wrote:
>
> >> acknowledge this (though not in public).
> >
you make broad sweeping
> > generalizations about an entire gender. Right.
>
> This is an opinion formed over more than two decades of exposure to
> the female deportment.
But, Milo, I'm sure you see the problem here. You're saying 'women', period.
Surely you know that that's logically untrue. Afterall, it only takes one
example to disprove this statement, and I've got more than one example that
disproves it. Like I said before, you mean "the women you've dealt with"
'cause you haven't dealt with all women. Logically, this follows simply
because you haven't met my friends and they disprove your statement. Like
you, I choose my friends carefully, so you can trust me on this one.
> >> Read Ecclesiastes 7:25-28. Then come back and talk some more.
> >
> > I read it. Are you calling me a woman with a snaring heart and banding
hands?
>
> No, I'm saying that of *most* women. As I said before, the Cammy
> Whites and the Jenn Dolaris are extremely rare.
THAT is what I was waiting to hear. Thank you. :) You used a relative term
and not an absolute one. So glad...yes..so very glad. :)
Moral of story: Say what you mean...even if it takes that extra 4 keystrokes.
:)
> > Cambridge version of Old Testament says (concerning women in Ecc 7:26 and
28)
> >
> > 26: And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and
nets, and her hands as bands:
> > whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by
her
> >
> > Read it. This verse isn't talking about all women as you are, it's saying
that the woman WITH SNARING AND
> > NETTING HEART is something people should avoid. This isn't some blanket
statement about an entire gender. Do
> > you see me as some evil internet temptress trying to snare you?
>
> No, that's *not* what King Solomon (one of the wisest men ever to
> have lived) is saying. There's a comma after "the woman." He's
> making one of those evil blanket generalizations.
Ah ah ah! Not true.
What Solomon is saying in that passage deals with the women that HE was
dealing with. You'll note that he explicitly said that HE found one upright
man out of a thousand, but no upright women. Again, however, Solomon
couldn't have possibly meant this of all women simply because he could not
have dealt with all women...and I know there were more than one thousand
women in existence on the earth at that time.
See, you've got to remember: If Jesus is the truth, the light, and the way
and Jesus is God, then you can use logic to get at the truth, provided you
know the correct truth values. (This is the post-Discrete Mathematics Onaje
talking.) :)
BTW, y'all, get an New International Version Study Bible. It's tons more
clear, though all clarity and revelation ultimately comes from the Holy
Spirit. (Yes, there's scripture to support that. Pray..then read.)
> Your convenient
> interpretation is directly contradictory to this next bit:
>
> > 28: Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have
I found; but a woman amnog all
> > those have I not found
> >
> > Yes, girls who play games are hard to find. Maybe you're not looking in the
right place.
>
> Maybe. More probably, fewer than one in a thousand women are
> worth my time, as the passage indicates. By my experience, it's
> definitely looking that way.
Well, take heart, Milo. I can tell you that though they are rare, they
exist. Ain't it funny how people think something doesn't exist just because
they haven't experienced it, yet? (Read that as many ways as you like,
because there are tons of things I'm referring to here.)
Bottom line: ('cause you must have faith (and patience) to stand a chance.)
Onaje Everett
In article <3725ECF9...@grommit.com>,
Cammy White <ca...@grommit.com> wrote:
>
>
> "Milo D. Cooper" wrote:
>
> > What are you talking about? Professional female athletes are
> > commonplace. Basketball, tennis, and various olympic sports are replete
> > with female athletes, many of them household names.
>
> Um... We're not going to make it to the pros. We're not even *trying* to
become pros. I don't care HOW commonplace
> female professional athletes are, a 5'6" asian girl like me is not gonna make
it to the WNBA.
Actually, you don't really know that. Look at the NBA. Look at Muggsy
Bogues and Spud Webb. They're the shortest players in the NBA, but they're
in the NBA. You can do anything, provided you believe. Of course, then you
have to be gifted with abilities like they are. Still, you'll never make it
if you never try. :)
> > No, I'm saying that of *most* women. As I said before, the Cammy
> > Whites and the Jenn Dolaris are extremely rare.
>
> So women as a whole are the ones who are snaring and netting people? Oi...
No, Cammy. Read it again. He said *most*...which is, unfortunately, true.
There's more than one way to 'snare and net' a person and drag them down with
you.
> > No, that's *not* what King Solomon (one of the wisest men ever to
> > have lived) is saying. There's a comma after "the woman." He's
> > making one of those evil blanket generalizations. Your convenient
> > interpretation is directly contradictory to this next bit:
>
> I don't see how it follows. Solomon was wise, yes, but he was also one of the
> biggest womanizers of all time. Look it up. 700 wives. 300 concubines. If he
> _hasn't_ found the woman yet, I wonder who those 1,000 people are...
Actually, if you think about it, the second he started collecting women was
the second he lost his wisdom. If you ask God for something and He gives it
to you, you'd better use it...otherwise, He'll snatch it right back from you.
A wise man never goes against God. Solomon wasn't wise when he started up
his 'collection'. He was wise when he was doing God's will.
I just KNOW this isn't going to get read by a lot of people. Oh well.
> As for the verse, the comma serves to set aside the particular type of woman
> he's talking about, not to talk about all women in general.
Glad you saw that. Besides, he couldn't be talking about all women because
there were WAY more than 1,000 women on the planet at that time. It was a
survey...and we should all know that surveys of a portion of a population
generally aren't an accurate reflection of the whole population.
> > Maybe. More probably, fewer than one in a thousand women are
> > worth my time, as the passage indicates. By my experience, it's
> > definitely looking that way.
>
> Maybe if people like you had a more open mind they might actually be willing
> to come out.
Actually, though I hate to say it, that argument is kinda played out. The
whole 'product of your environment' thing isn't true. Ultimately, you make
the choice to play or leave. Think about what it would look like if all
those Christians being persecuted in China decided not to profess their faith
just because they were being persecuted.
Granted, that's an extreme example, but it's the same principle: You should
ALWAYS stand up for what you believe in as long as it's true. Let the truth
do the rest.
Onaje Everett
> a hint, ask yourself why _Titanic_ was such a massive hit with the
> ladies. Think about what Kate did to attract Leonardo.
Blame God for it, 'cause that's how he made them.
Men were made as initiators and hunters. Women were made as providers and
care-givers. It's in the Word. Read both books of Corinthians (lots of good
stuff in there).
Now, granted, some men are naturally good at being providers and some women
are naturally good at being initiators, but, in the end, my initial statement
is how we were designed to be. It then becomes a matter of what we do with
it.
So what are you saying, Milo? You want a woman to chase you for a change? :)
I don't blame you, but in the end, we've got to do our job.
Onaje Everett
> >
> > Milo D. Cooper wrote in message <3725639F...@milos-chalkboard.net>...
> > >And women wonder why we seem to
> > >want nothing from them but sex! What else do they have to offer?
> >
> > Come to think of it, what do men have to offer?
>
> Not much, it's true (as I wrote earlier, with my Ecclesiastes
> reference). But it's more than what most women have to offer.
> What's a woman's minimum requirement of a man? Good looks and
> financial success. Asking for anything more is excessive, and
> is likely to lead to disappointment. What's a man's minimum
> requirement? Good looks. Asking for anything more is excessive,
> and is likely to lead to disappointment.
OUCH!!!!
Okay...while that may be dreadfully true (sorry, people, but it IS true),
think about what kind of person would set their standards so low.
Now, think about this in reference to video games. If you're not any good at
a game and you only have fun when you win, what kind of game will you flock
to? An easy one. Can't anyone win at an easy game? Yes. What does that
mean about your victory in that game? It ain't worth JACK!
Now, think about this in reference to relationships. If you have nothing to
offer, what are you going to flock to? People of the opposite sex with
nothing to offer. Isn't it easy to find someone with nothing to offer? Yes.
What does that say about your find? It ain't worth JACK!!!!
See my point? The person that KNOWS he/she has something to offer doesn't go
after those that don't. However, in that process, you have to realize that
the reason why finding someone else that has something to offer is so
valuable and important is because......that type of person is rare.
The reason why a diamond is so valuable is not because of its beauty, but
because of its rarity. I'm looking for a diamond myself...'cause I AM a
diamond (I'm not perfect, but I'm seeking perfection. Direction, not
deeds.)...but I realized long ago that in that process, there would be few
that fit into what I was looking for. However, the most important thing that
I've been able to realize is that *I* am not going to be able to even find
the one that will fit that description. This is where God comes in and says
that if I seek Him and His kingdom first, ALL things will be given to me
(Matthew 6:33). God is my provider. He gives me what I need. Sometimes, He
happens to give me what I want, too (but only because that want was actually
a need) (John 5:9). Wait on God, no matter how long it takes. If it's His
will, He'll bless you with someone. If it's not His will, you need to trust
Him because, believe it or not, you're better off (I Corinthians 7).
God knows what he's doing. Trust Him at all times and you'll see. :)