|
Post by simrion on Mar 31, 2024 19:34:57 GMT -5
In response to the sexual objectification comments how about that "risqué" Eldritch Wizardry cover? Boy would I love originals of the covers, for artistic appreciation purposes of course.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 31, 2024 22:02:51 GMT -5
The Perilous Dreamer and alaharon123 as the Admin I have edited several of your posts to remove the things that are least helpful to the discussion. @jamesdixon I also edited you a little as well.
|
|
|
Post by alaharon123 on Mar 31, 2024 22:44:20 GMT -5
[Gygax] actually did things that contradict your point of view. I think you are ascribing things to my point of view that I did not say. Please don't do that. (sorry, this is a big pet peeve of mine when people say I said something that I did not actually say. I get very annoyed irl)
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 31, 2024 23:01:10 GMT -5
I think you are ascribing things to my point of view that I did not say. Please don't do that. (sorry, this is a big pet peeve of mine when people say I said something that I did not actually say. I get very annoyed irl) I didn't. I replied directly to this specifically, "I get the impression that in 1974, most things were written this way, but if you read it with fresh eyes and try to empathize with what it reads like to someone who's not a man, it jumps out a lot." You changed the definition of man from the well over 1,000 year old definition that encompassed all of mankind to just men. That's a you problem. Admin: It is time to drop this, none of this is useful or productive.
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Mar 31, 2024 23:01:18 GMT -5
I hear and (I think I) understand the perspectives of the people on both sides of this "men" issue.
I think it's helpful in these instances to recognize that those who appear to disagree with you may not in truth support the things you are against.
I support discussion in good faith and am not accusing anyone on this thread of doing anything in bad faith, just making this remark.
Edit: whoops, just saw Admin's comment above.
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Mar 31, 2024 23:03:29 GMT -5
I hear and (I think I) understand the perspectives of the people on both sides of this "men" issue. I think it's helpful in these instances to recognize that those who appear to disagree with you may not in truth support the things you are against. I support discussion in good faith and am not accusing anyone on this thread of doing anything in bad faith, just making this remark. Edit: whoops, just saw Admin's comment above.And he liked your comment, so I would assume you are making a good point.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 31, 2024 23:05:13 GMT -5
I hear and (I think I) understand the perspectives of the people on both sides of this "men" issue. I think it's helpful in these instances to recognize that those who appear to disagree with you may not in truth support the things you are against. I support discussion in good faith and am not accusing anyone on this thread of doing anything in bad faith, just making this remark. Edit: whoops, just saw Admin's comment above.And he liked your comment, so I would assume you are making a good point. Correct it is the snipping back and forth that needs to stop.
|
|
|
Post by alaharon123 on Mar 31, 2024 23:07:29 GMT -5
I think you are ascribing things to my point of view that I did not say. Please don't do that. (sorry, this is a big pet peeve of mine when people say I said something that I did not actually say. I get very annoyed irl) I didn't. I replied directly to this specifically, "I get the impression that in 1974, most things were written this way, but if you read it with fresh eyes and try to empathize with what it reads like to someone who's not a man, it jumps out a lot." You changed the definition of man from the well over 1,000 year old definition that encompassed all of mankind to just men. That's a you problem. Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant, my bad. (I hope this is ok to post since I'm not sniping back, but apologizing)
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 1, 2024 12:34:17 GMT -5
I didn't. I replied directly to this specifically, "I get the impression that in 1974, most things were written this way, but if you read it with fresh eyes and try to empathize with what it reads like to someone who's not a man, it jumps out a lot." You changed the definition of man from the well over 1,000 year old definition that encompassed all of mankind to just men. That's a you problem. Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant, my bad. (I hope this is ok to post since I'm not sniping back, but apologizing) You are fine, I am enjoying your discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Jakob Grimm on Apr 2, 2024 19:17:45 GMT -5
Jakob Grimm have an exalt for providing this video. I just watched it recently. Disgraceful. It really is. In the original WotC video, the interviewer, I am not sure what it is about him, but he just oozes slime. Something truly unwholesome about that guy. The guy being interviewed talks about fond memories and goes off on that BS inclusive garbage. There was nothing wrong with the game, some DMs at some tables sure, there were creeps out there, but that is in no way the games fault.
|
|
|
Post by Jakob Grimm on Apr 2, 2024 19:19:09 GMT -5
In response to the sexual objectification comments how about that "risqué" Eldritch Wizardry cover? Boy would I love originals of the covers, for artistic appreciation purposes of course. People want to act like "risqué" art is not inclusive, apparently no one has seen the art that female artists create.
|
|