Lurker > yoshifan823

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #090

I always enjoy broadening my horizons.

Clearly you do not

Haha, keep stalling.

Right. The basic idea of "like yourself, try to better yourself, and be confident in yourself" are good things to keep in mind. It's just that it's slathered in so much condescension and hateful speech that while it implants those good ideas, it puts much, much worse ones in there, too.

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #086

If I acted like the ideal guy in that dumb test, rejection would happen. A lot.

So it's fear of rejection.

Unless you are claiming that using the technique exemplified in the test would NEVER work? Because this site is for teaching betas who get ZERO girls, to get a girl. More than zero is an improvement.

Also keep in mind that you are completely missing the point of the articles on that blog, which is common, so don't feel bad. I won't even try to explain to you how not every word on that blog is to be taken literally, since the concept seems way beyond your grasp. Just keep that in the back of your head, though.

Thanks for the backhanded comment. Please, explain this concept, I always enjoy broadening my horizons.

vcharon posted...

I keep hoping I'll stop seeing this topic at the top of the topic list.

You know, a way to stop that is to not post in it.

Uglyface2 posted...

OlDirtyNumbers posted...

people are happy when people come out of the closet because homosexuals are persecuted and feel the need to hide this uncontrollable facet of themselves when they shouldn't have to.

how is this hard to understand

Have you been reading this topic? Who's persecuted the TC? He's been getting nothing but support here.

Because we are decent people who don't judge based off of sexual orientation. The whole world is not like this topic.

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #079

You will be laughed at, and mocked as soon as you go away.

Ah, it all comes to this. Fear of rejection.

It's not fear of rejection. If I acted like the ideal guy in that dumb test, rejection would happen. A lot. Because normal people do not act that way. If you're putting on some facade for the purpose of getting laid, the smarter girls are gonna notice, and you are left with the ones who don't know better. And they're generally not worth it, in my eyes. If your sole purpose for going out is to find a girl to sleep with, then that might work, but if you start living your life like that, the only girls you're gonna attract are the ones who wouldn't be worth it for the long haul. Not even talking in terms of "one true love!!!!", but just in terms of day to day living. What happens when you can't keep that facade up any longer? I'm not interested in sleeping with random girl after random girl. If the way I act naturally leads me into a one night stand, that's cool, but I don't go out with the intention of getting laid.

Uglyface2 posted...

Erugios posted...

What exactly is wrong with "coming out" being a coming of age thing, Uglyface?

It just bothers me that this is so celebrated, like it's a good thing when it's really just a thing. Saying that you're gay gets nearly everyone to slap you on the back and say you're great, while being me means... well, I'm sure you can work that out from the last couple of pages.

I'm just saying that this isn't a bat mitzvah. It's a guy telling his dad, "Hey, I'm sexually aroused by men." It shouldn't be as big a deal as society makes it out to be.

Ideally, yes, but as long as we continue to live in a society where gay people are treated as lesser people, it's a big deal.

vcharon posted...

Just because he's gay doesn't mean he's automatically getting a date and you still aren't, you know. That's not how it works, I'm pretty sure at least. Maybe someone can back me up on it but gay people have relationship woes just the same as straight people do.

Actually, once you come out to your parents, you are assigned a boyfriend (girlfriend for the ladies), and from then on, any and all relationship problems cease to exist.

At least, that's what I read in my friend's "Gay Rulebook". The foreward was written by Liberace.

CoolCly posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #039

vcharon posted...

Hey, here's a word of advice yoshifan: Stop arguing about this topic on this board.

I know. I'm almost as dumb, because I think that with enough common sense and shame, these guys will change, when they need a lot more than that.

....Change what?


You said that the concept of the friend zone is flawed, then went ahead and described exactly how it happens, even saying it happened to you. Is it unhealthy? Maybe. But it's a thing and it exists, there's really nothing flawed about the concept. It happens to both guys and girls. It may happen to the people on this board, but it's not an issue that's unique to board 8ers or somethign.

Soooo I honestly have no idea what your point is here.

That was aimed at the whole "roissey alpha/beta" crowd, not the friend zone thing.

Also, I don't think I can take any dude seriously with stuff like:

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/the-sixteen-commandments-of-poon/
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/dating-market-value-test-for-men/
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/dating-market-value-test-for-women/

It's just so hilariously off point that I can't help but laugh. If you can say "(C) ”This could be trouble ’cause I’m that kind of guy.” *smirk*" without laughing, and without a shred of irony, you are the problem. You will be laughed at, and mocked as soon as you go away. Which you will do without telling anyone, because you are mysterious and cool.

Erugios posted...

yoshifan823 posted...

Obama. I'm of the opinion that you should vote in every election you can, so even if the guy isn't perfect, he's the best option up there.

I agree you should vote in every election, but I disagree with "settling" for a candidate

In a contest like this (a close one), you pretty much have to vote for the person who is going to **** it up the least. I mean, sure, one vote, not a lot, but if enough people think that way, and vote for a write-in, or 3rd party who has no feasable chance, it could lead the way for the other person to win. Obama is clearly better than Romney, thus, Obama it is.

"And this is why roissey is dumb. Him, and his followers, view women as inferior, existing solely to f***, and they spout horrible "biotruths" because they would like to convince themselves that they're better than other guys because "at least we admit it", when in fact, they're just dumb guys who view women as inferior, existing solely to f***. There's a huge strain of misogyny running through this entire group of people, just like their political counterparts, Men's Rights Activists. If it makes me appear weak to respect women as people in your eyes, I'll take it, because clearly your eyes are f***ed up."

So... This. Exactly this, all over again.

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #058

How do we know any of the guys in this situation don't think the same way?

Because if they did, they wouldn't be sharing a chick with 7 other dudes

So I'll ask you the same question. What's the difference between a girl who is having sex with multiple guys, and a guy who is having sex with multiple girls?

Swifticuffs posted...

bro who are you telling? i'm so far against marriage and having kids. But the point is I have enough intellect to understand that we as humans have painted this bigass picture of "love" and made things super complex. It boils down to what I said, end of story. It doesn't mean we're cavemen if we still understand where we came from and how all other mammals (or most I guess) act and why. Take control of that, but don't turn into one of these modern day hippies who buys into this whole love and perfect match and stuff. Wanting to be with someone outside of physical attractiveness sure... personality is boss, so is having some things in common. But let's say you do want kids? Let's say you do want to marry someone... looks are friggen' important. do you want an ugly ass kid so he can be made fun of forever? lol. do you want to get bored of your lover in 5 years and just have another typical divorce like the american population has become riddled with? Looks are damn important.

And yes, women are people. And from what I've seen, no matter where I go in whatever state I've been to, the hotter the girl, the more drama there is We've already detailed what that is... it doesn't mean women aren't people, it means the hot ones who need to be treated like princesses 24/7 (and I'm talking hot, my standards are high. these ones are usually complete pains.) aren't my idea of fun to be friends with. It's why my female friends are average or ugly. I don't want hot female friends, i want to screw the hot females I bump into. Otherwise see you later unless you have the greatest personality ever, like my uglier girlfriends have, and I've yet to encounter many that way. They're usually pre-Madonnas with nothing in common with me and I don't got time for it.

Then the problem isn't with their looks, it's with their attitude. You're judging all hot women before you really know them, assuming that they're all high maintenance and need to be treated like princesses 24/7. There are most definitely girls like that, but their attractiveness is pretty unrelated to it.

And I don't know about you, but people tend to get more or less attractive the more I learn about them. A girl who is really hot, but kinda shallow, personality-wise isn't going to be as attractive to me as someone who isn't quite as hot, but our personalities are much more in sync. I'm not going to want to stay with someone because they're physically attractive, because there's only so long you can look at someone and not see them for their personality. I'd much rather have someone I can spend time with and have fun with, and those are the marriages that last, not the ones where there's a hot girl involved. Those marriages end because the people just didn't have enough in common, and grew apart.

ExThaNemesis posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #055

Just out of curiosity, is there a difference between this and a guy who has multiple female sexual partners to you?

Yeah. A guy with multiple sexual partners is going to be much happier!

I meant between a man with multiple sexual partners and a woman with multiple sexual partners, but this brings up an interesting point. You immediately assume that any guy in this situation is going to be only having sex with that one woman? How do we know any of the guys in this situation don't think the same way?

ExThaNemesis posted...

there's nothing wrong with guys in the friendzone other than their inability to grasp the facets of attraction. A girl collects beta orbiters because it allows her to soak in male attention and affection without having to reciprocate.

http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/14/every-woman-needs-a-gaggle-of-men/#comments

they call it a gaggle now, and CNN and other major media outlets are literally advising women to snag as many beta orbiters as possible.

I mean, the word "gaggle" makes me inherently not take this too seriously, but this basically talks about the line between "friend" and "sexual partner", and how it's blurring.

Just out of curiosity, is there a difference between this and a guy who has multiple female sexual partners to you?

ExThaNemesis posted...

lmfao yoshifan I had hoped you were a girl with how vehement and misandrist you've been in the past few topics, but this topic has been an eye opener.

BTW: Misandry is only a thing about as much as white rights are.

"I'm a straight, white male, and dammit, I'm being discriminated against. Never mind my natural social advantage of being straight, white, and male."

Swifticuffs posted...

Two of my best friends are women. I don't see how it's being antisocial to not want to be friendzoned. If we get off our highhorses and stop thinking on this "deep" level like you're trying to think, life boils down to reproduction with a healthy mate. Healthy mate is someone hot. That's why when you go walking down the street and see a hot girl, the first thing a normal dude thinks is "wow i'd like to bone that chick." Which is also why when you fail to get that to transpire, you usually don't stick around because nine times out of ten the chick doesn't have much in common with the average male. I don't see what's fun about sitting through hours of drama 24/7 and just being reminded of not being able to tap something hot.

But way to automatically assume someone doesn't like hanging out with women entirely just because he doesn't like drama the hot ones produce. Maybe you need to grow up a bit more even moreso from your 15-17 year old days as you described up above.

That or get off the high horse that every net kid goes through at some time of life. Things are realllllyy simple.

I guess this is where we differ. Life is a lot more than just "reproduction with a healthy mate". We are not cavemen. People can want to be with someone for reasons other than physical attractiveness, and even then, you can not want to reproduce. There's careers, there's fulfilling life events, there are all sorts of things that people want things that don't just boil down to that.

Also, hot girls are people too. I'm not gonna lie and say that most of the time, when I see a hot girl, I think "wow I'd like to bone that chick", but there's a difference between wanting to have sex with someone and enjoying someone's company. I don't know exactly what kind of "drama" you're talking about, but I'm pretty sure that it's not just the hot ones that attract it. There are plenty of attractive women who have things in common with "average guys", because there's a wide swath of guys in that group. "Average guys" can have a lot of different interests. So can hot girls. Women are people, men are people. There is not much difference between the two, and that's what this really comes down to.

Swifticuffs posted...

you can respect women as people and still pretty much want your only relationships with those outside of cousin, mother, sister to be sex or see ya later. it doesn't mean they're sex objects if the first thought that comes across your mind when you see a hot girl is "wow i'd like to bone her."

it also doesn't mean they're sex objects if you don't have time for their nonsense outside of sexual behavior. Most hot girls are incredibly high maintenance... I've had my fair share of friend zone style experiences when I actually thought "hey, maybe it isn't bad to be friends with this chick." Yeah... nothing in common, high strung, and nothing but a **** tease 24/7.

Are you antisocial and hate all people, or just not like hanging out with women? Either way, why?

vcharon posted...

Hey, here's a word of advice yoshifan: Stop arguing about this topic on this board.

I know. I'm almost as dumb, because I think that with enough common sense and shame, these guys will change, when they need a lot more than that.

UltimaterializerX posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #018

The idea of a "friend zone" is flawed, because it is essentially reducing women to sex objects.

All men think this way, roissey just tells people to stop denying it.

And this is why roissey is dumb. Him, and his followers, view women as inferior, existing solely to f***, and they spout horrible "biotruths" because they would like to convince themselves that they're better than other guys because "at least we admit it", when in fact, they're just dumb guys who view women as inferior, existing solely to f***. There's a huge strain of misogyny running through this entire group of people, just like their political counterparts, Men's Rights Activists. If it makes me appear weak to respect women as people in your eyes, I'll take it, because clearly your eyes are f***ed up.

foolm0ron posted...

Interesting. All the people I know who have been/are friend zone'd are just like "I love being in your presence because you have nice hair" and not "grr why won't you have sex with me yet I hate you".

Seriously, all the "harem" girls that I have seen always have really nice hair. I think that's the key to attracting the betas.

I think that's just a way to attract guys in general. I like nice hair.

WazzupGenius00 posted...

seems like a lot of work when you could just go f*** some other chick

Yes. If all you want is something to have sex with, buy a hooker, or a fleshlight.

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #018

The people who are in the "friend zone" continue to hang around because they think, eventually, with enough time and effort and "being there" for someone, you are owed sex. So, when the girl, who assumes that the person is actually a friend, and not a creep hanging around her because he wants to bone her, continues to not have sex with that person, they get offended, and slowly start to hate her, still wanting to have sex with her because they've put in too much time and effort in to not have sex with her.

So is this describing you?

If so, that is pretty damn disgusting.

Or maybe I am the one with the "unusual" friend zone experience.

Was. I was 15-17, so I was more about "1 truuuu luvvvvv" than "I want to bone you", but essentially, yeah. I believed that we were "meant to be", and that she just didn't know it (very dumb, and pretty insulting to her, too), but I stuck around, hoping she'd realize that. It was wrong, and dumb, and like I said, embarrassing that I acted that way. I never quite reached that last stage of pure hate, but it was pretty condescending, which is a different kind of hate.

UltimaterializerX posted...

Game Informer only still exists because Gamestop pushes that crap on people.

Pretty much, yeah, but that's always why they've existed.

foolm0ron posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #018

The idea of a "friend zone" is flawed, because it is essentially reducing women to sex objects.

I think YOUR idea of the friend zone is what is flawed, since your description is all wrong. It's more complex than that on both the male and female ends, so it's really not reducing anyone to a sex object until people like you come along and claim it to be so.

It even seems like you're never been friend zone'd, which is great for you in a sense, but I feel like you're missing out on a critical learning experience.

Oh no, I have. I spent 3 years of high school being best friends with a girl, in that exact situation. I know what it is, and looking back on it, I'm embarrassed at how I acted with her. We're still friends, but a much more normal, healthy friendship. I should have realized that she was obviously not into me, and was pretty clear about that, even though she never straight out said it. Maybe I have the benefit of hindsight, but staying in that sort of relationship hinders both people, and I'm glad I don't do it any more, because holy crap I felt perpetually horrible about myself.

Also, the article in the OP is disgusting because holy crap, it is literally reducing women to sex objects. "At some point you’ll have to make a bold move for her vagina." is not something normal, healthy people say, unless "her vagina" is some sort of slang term for a football endzone, and your last name is Harbaugh.

I mean, if you just want sex, don't be a creep who is using "science" and "game" to get it. Go to a bar and talk to a girl like she's a human being, same as you, and if she likes you, go for it. That's my whole issue with this "alpha/beta" thing, is that the endgame is ****ing as many girls as possible, and if that's your goal, then you really need to rethink your entire life, because that's not healthy.

foolm0ron posted...

From: baubeta | #012

You're not in the friend zone. She isn't interested in you. The fact that you continue to "be her friend" in a vain attempt to bang her makes you a scum bag.

That's only about 50% of the time. And then you have the "Hyper Mega Friend Zone" girls that go around building a harem of friend zone'd guys that follow her around. They definitely want you to keep "being friends".

And you know what? Those girls are still in the right. Why should they be judged because they seem to attract the dudes that just want to have sex with her, but will wait years for the chance that they will never get, because they have some sort of "friendship + being nice = eventual sex!!!" Sure, they're taking advantage of these guys, but these guys are letting themselves be taken advantage of because of a misguided belief that simply by being nice, they will eventually be owed sex. I mean, these girls tend to make it abundantly clear that they're never going to be with these guys, even if they don't outright say it. It's their fault for staying around.

The idea of a "friend zone" is flawed, because it is essentially reducing women to sex objects. The people who are in the "friend zone" continue to hang around because they think, eventually, with enough time and effort and "being there" for someone, you are owed sex. So, when the girl, who assumes that the person is actually a friend, and not a creep hanging around her because he wants to bone her, continues to not have sex with that person, they get offended, and slowly start to hate her, still wanting to have sex with her because they've put in too much time and effort in to not have sex with her. These "relationships" end either when the guy just can't take it and basically asks "Why won't you **** me!?!!", and the girl, creeped out at what she thought was a friend basically coming out and revealing himself to be the massive douche he is, tells him off, and he writes her, and all women, off as whores, because she(they) won't have sex with him. Girls put you in the "friend zone", not because they don't want to have sex with you, but because they want to be friends with you. You're acting like a nice guy, and she's enjoying being flattered, so she continues to hang out with and talk to you. She doesn't know you're doing it because you want to have sex with her. And honestly, even if she does, it's totally within her right to take advantage of you like that, because you're being a dishonest creep.

Their Paper Mario review is a great piece of evidence for my "Review scores are dumb, just read the review" theorem.

Obama. I'm of the opinion that you should vote in every election you can, so even if the guy isn't perfect, he's the best option up there.

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Breaking out of the friendzone shouldnt be to get laid once. Its only really worth the effort is you like, potentially want to marry that person.

Yeah, but Roissy's articles usually contain advices to get a girl to have sex with you. I don't read his blog that often, though, so perhaps he's switched to "how to have a healthy relationship with a girl" now.

hahahahaahhaahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahlahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

*breathe*

hahahahaahhaahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahlahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha haahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

ha

Addendum:

How much are you expecting to spend on your post-HS education?

How are you getting the money to pay for it? (parents, loans, scholarships, etc.)

So, reading SMuffin's topic about higher education got me curious, and now I just want to ask a quick question of everyone.

Do you have a college diploma:

A: Yes
B: No

Are you currently in post-HS education:

A: Yes
B: No

If yes, is it for post-grad or undergrad?


What was/is your major?


If you are not currently in school, or have a college diploma, what is your occupation?


If you are currently in school, what do you expect to do with your diploma, job-wise/further schooling-wise?


If you're in High School now, what are you planning on doing after you graduate?


Any other information that might be relevant to this topic?

What we need are more people going to tech schools. If 50% of the people getting psych degrees, and other common, overpopulated majors (*cough*englishandcommunications*cough*) went to learn a trade instead (electrician, plumber, chef, AC repair, etc), I think the job market would be better off. I mean, at this point going into school for just a 4 year diploma isn't gonna help much unless you're in a tech field, or maybe math and some science. Everyone else is gonna need more time to either go into something like law or medicine, or end up getting the lowest possible wage job that has a "4-year degree" requirement.

I mean, everyone I know who got a 4-year degree within the past decade or so either is getting or has got even higher education, or is currently working at a restaurant/retail. Honestly, the most successful person I can think of who is in their twenties is my former manager at Blockbuster, who didn't go to college, instead choosing the army, then managed to become a manager by 24, and lives very comfortably in a house that he owns with his wife and kid, and has plenty of money for things like 3DTVs or cool tech stuff like that. The previous generation far overvalues a college degree, because everyone was able to get one at a much fairer rate than we are able to now, so it wasn't a $100,000 proposition to get a 4 year degree. If you know how to work it, or are smart/good enough, it still isn't, but most people don't/aren't.

Wait, what exclusives does the Xbox have? I mean, if they said Sony, I'd get it, but I can't really think of any exclusives, aside from some XBLA games.

For some actual input, I went to college for a semester, for theatre, and realized if I want to be doing stuff in the arts, I'm just gonna get out there and do it, and not have to pay 20k a semester to learn stuff I probably will learn by going out and just doing.

I did, however, go to community college to get a diploma in culinary arts, so I can cook if/when I need to. That won't make it any easier to get a job in theatre, but it will make it easier to get money until I start earning it doing what I want to do, if I do at all.

I don't get the whole "liberal arts school" thing. I mean, I want to be an actor. I went to high school. I got a 35 on my ACTs. Why the hell do I need to take a math class? Either I take calculus, which I never use again, or I take a class that teaches me things I've already learned, and I'm wasting money because of pointless rules that don't affect my chosen career. I think more specialized learning would be fantastic. If you don't know what you want to be? Go to community college. You don't learn anything in those first two years at a fantastic liberal arts school that you wouldn't learn at your local CC, and you do so in the latter for a huge, huge discount. I know there are advantages to the bigger private schools, but college has really turned into a money making game, and that needs to be turned around.

Ugh another SmartMuffin topic, time to go see what he's ****ing on this time.

Oh.

No, yeah, you're pretty much right.

Carry on.

Haha, I'm completely shocked that an unwarranted attack got modded. Truly shocked.

BTW: Men's Rights is a crock designed to attract men who weren't loved enough by their mommy and assume that all women are horrible beings designed to suck their semen and money forever and ever.

StealThisSheen posted...

yoshifan823 posted...

They should strive to be better by making the gameplay compatible with the story that they're trying to tell. This particular game is not gonna do that, like pretty much all other games that are coming out/have come out, and no one seems particularly willing or wanting to change that. Games right now at least sometimes have characters that match the gameplay, or don't have character at all, so they don't have that dissonance.

So you're saying a character either has to be a personality-less badass to match gameplay

Or have the gameplay be boring as f*** to match any character building.

Now I see why Kanz made clear not to be lumped in with your argument.

The gameplay doesn't have to be boring in order to match character building. Look at games like Ratchet and Clank, or Pikmin, or any Mario game.

KingButz posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #139

t might, if this was a movie we were talking about. But in a video game, when you put the character in the hands of a player, they turn into a highly capable killing machine almost immediately. That will, odds are, in the moment right after that attempted rape, when Lara shoots a guy for the first time. And from then on, she turns into Female Nathan Drake, cracking wise and blowing guys up.

How can you even know this? Have you played the finished game already? Just because the game is portrayed in a specific way by marketing doesn't mean that is how the game actually is. For a lot of games, the marketing isn't even representative of the finished product!

And like I said, I'll be happy if I'm proven wrong, but I'm pretty sure I won't be.

StealThisSheen posted...

yoshifan823 posted...

It might, if this was a movie we were talking about. But in a video game, when you put the character in the hands of a player, they turn into a highly capable killing machine almost immediately. That will, odds are, in the moment right after that attempted rape, when Lara shoots a guy for the first time. And from then on, she turns into Female Nathan Drake, cracking wise and blowing guys up.

So, let me get this straight.

After saying video games should strive to be better

You're now saying that video games should never give characters personality that may make them vulnerable because they become "highly capable killing machines" in the hands of the player.

You just got done saying video games should have higher expectations

And then say "No, she shouldn't be vulnerable because this isn't a movie."


'Sup, Kanz. You seem to be the only one being logical right now of the two.

They should strive to be better by making the gameplay compatible with the story that they're trying to tell. This particular game is not gonna do that, like pretty much all other games that are coming out/have come out, and no one seems particularly willing or wanting to change that. Games right now at least sometimes have characters that match the gameplay, or don't have character at all, so they don't have that dissonance.

XIII_rocks posted...

It makes character sense for Lara to be more vulnerable and less tough and whatever, though.

Like, does this not just seem really obvious

It might, if this was a movie we were talking about. But in a video game, when you put the character in the hands of a player, they turn into a highly capable killing machine almost immediately. That will, odds are, in the moment right after that attempted rape, when Lara shoots a guy for the first time. And from then on, she turns into Female Nathan Drake, cracking wise and blowing guys up.

foolm0ron posted...

So it's just an issue of video game writers being worse than TV show drama writers. It's not really about rape or anything like that at all.

Glad we could get down to the meat of the issue.

No it is about rape. Video game writers are worse than TV show writers, and even in the case of the latter, there aren't too many who can handle a sensitive subject like rape, so why should I expect the former to be able to do it?

StealThisSheen posted...

yoshifan823 posted...

Yes, "Lara may NOT have been the greatest female icon for women characters in gaming (Because that belongs to The Boss). But she was one of the first female badasses that can shoot bears and TRexes." is the exact same as "women really don't mind being glorified sex objects and trophies."

She wasn't the best character, but at least she was a proactive, confident woman who could deal with her own ****.

Nice cherry picking there. But let me pick, you know, the first thing she actually says about the character.

"So lets see...let's remove Lara from being fully badass to weak 'Whedon-flavored female hero' bull because you know...that's exactly what I want to see in Lara. Not a confident badass fully aware of her sexuality. Nope, can't have that, might scare the boys are TARGET DEMO."

Lara wasn't a "confident badass aware of her sexuality." She was a mostly personality-less sex object and exactly the thing they hate being glorified. But suddenly now she was a badass fully aware of her sexuality? What, because she shows weakness instead of "BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM I KILLED ALL OF YOU NO SWEAT LOLOL."

Yeah, basically. At least when she was treated as a personality-less sex object (and personality-less isn't 100% true), she was being treated essentially the same as the male heroes like Nathan Drake and the like, not exactly the prime example of a strong female character, but at least a step in the right direction, compared to previous tries, but this is a step 100% in the wrong direction. It's not a complaint as in "We loved Lara Croft just as she was", but "THIS IS EVEN WORSE DEAR GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU".

foolm0ron posted...

*SVU SPOILERS*

Do you think that episode of SVU where Benson almost gets raped was bad? That was one of the best episodes. The way they describe the story for this game sounds great, honestly. I don't see how you can be "disgusted" by the thought of an almost-rape. You know people actually get raped in real life, right? Stop acting so sheltered.

Yeah, but the difference is that SVU is a TV show written by capable writers, and Tomb Raider is a video game written by video game writers. SVU's main function is to tell a good story in a mature fashion, aimed at a wide audience, and Tomb Raider's is to tell a story suited best for a game where you go around shooting dudes, and is aimed primarily at men ages 15-30.

One of these sounds a little more suited to dealing with a story about rape than the other.

KingButz posted...

From: yoshifan823 | #098

She wasn't the best character, but at least she was a proactive, confident woman who could deal with her own ****.

She was a pair of boobs holding guns

She was also one of the first female action heroes in video gaming. It was bad that she was essentially created for sexual exploitation, but you can look at the bright side, because at least it started a trend. Without Lara Croft, we probably wouldn't have Jade, or The Boss, or any of the other good female characters we have.

KingButz posted...

If you are looking towards video games for quality writing you are looking at the wrong place imo

Why does that have to be the case though? Why can't we have quality writing in video games? Because the audience for them is terrible? We should want to change that, instead of just sitting back and not caring.

Yes, "Lara may NOT have been the greatest female icon for women characters in gaming (Because that belongs to The Boss). But she was one of the first female badasses that can shoot bears and TRexes." is the exact same as "women really don't mind being glorified sex objects and trophies."

She wasn't the best character, but at least she was a proactive, confident woman who could deal with her own ****.

KingButz posted...

So now you are saying that you know that video games have subpar writing (that's pretty much a given in the medium) but we have to hold Tomb Raider to some higher standard?

We should hold all games to a higher standard. I'm not gonna buy Tomb Raider the same as I'm not gonna buy the new Call of Duty, or Medal of Honor.

TheConductorSix posted...

This topic is hilarious for so Many reasons. So far we have

1. Guys learning that women really don't mind being glorified sex objects and trophies.
2. Guys learning how dumb it sounds when other guys defend feminist tripe
3. Everyone realizing that feminists are hypocritical idiots

Where did any of this happen? Maybe number 2, maybe number 3, but the people "learning" that are dumb to begin with.