Honestly, anyone trying to turn a card game - a virtual one at that - into a sport has their head so far up their ass I'm surprised they can manage to breath.
They changed the ruleset.
IeSF changed their rules after Hearthstone controversy, male-only tournaments will now be open for both genders
Now I know how to gain publicity when I am going to make my own small tournament. Nothing is better than rustling some jimmies, then issuing an "apology" (sorry not sorry) and ride on the given publicity's success
Do I think women should be allowed to participate on equal grounds in...Hearthstone? Yeah
Is ActiBlizzin obligated to have 'co-ed' tourneys? no
you may enjoy it, which is great, but life experiences and claims about sexism are not willy-nilly; these contributions are important to any sort of epistemological argument, which is what is fundamentally the kind of discussion is going on.I don't need a study but I happen to enjoy having factual evidence instead of what a lot of people on this topic and similar ones do where they mostly use life experiences, and claiming "that's sexism/isn't sexism" somewhat willy-nilly.
for example, are they obligated to have co-ed tourneys? you say no. here is what the claim "they're wrong to not have the tourneys because it's sexist" is saying:
Do women and men have the same rights in society? Yes.
Is it immoral to deny one class of persons the rights given to another, or to erect obstacles to those rights? Yes.
Fundamentally, do people and institutions own their behavior, i.e. are responsible for it? Yes.
In addition to the laws regarding fair treatment of classes of persons, are they compelled by society and by morality to act morally? Yes.
Do e-athletes of either gender have a right to participate in a non-gendered sport? Yes.
Thusly, is it wrong to deny participation of a class of persons in an event where the sport is non-gendered? Yes.
Does their decision deny participation of a class of persons in an event where the sport is non-gendered? Yes.
Their decision violates both laws legal and moral, therefore they are compelled to address this fact adequately, either by changing their decision or making amends.
Hmmm I didn't think there were laws that would prevent them as doing such(saying no to women) so that's what I meant. Again I think they should have women allowed as default, Just I didn't think it was (currently) illegal to have the separation in place.
Anecdotal evidence is ok for the feels, but making decisions on it is so 14th century.
Why do people constantly say they want world peace, but it never happens?
I say they are making it too easy for themselves.
Do you really think that the law gives hold to an argument, that the female NFL in the US which was only founded in 2000 is required to be given equal screen time to the male competition (I am not asking anyone's opinions here, but what the law thinks about this question). No? Well in that case what you said about the law doesn't hold.
Concerning Morals: Is it bad on moral grounds that they don't? What do you do, if it doesn't work out? Do you end the male sportsman careers or do you force sportswoman to compete? Do you institute a quota that everyone must watch, if people dare to just turn of the TV set?
For everyone's information:
The public has no morals. The public outcry is not a moral instance. What is done because of it is not a force for good. It's evil impersonated. It's even worse than Abraham's god. The thing it does, is bad by default. The public opinion is the thing that gave us the crusades, the inquisition, the 3rd Reich, the KKK, gender inequalities, slavery, any prosecution of any sexuality, every war since arguably the beginning of modern times...
The public opinion is an animal and it doesn't care about morals or moral consequence. And ffs, I am sick of people daring to play judge and executioner on the base of skimming over half an article online, while gloating over their own moral righteousness.
The hypocrisy of it has tired out my tolerance entirely. This kind of act is entirely worse than the things it tracks down and which it kills to feed it's obscene sense of justice. People don't do this shit to do good. They do it, because they enjoy the power that comes with destroying things, that belong to others.
The public is the ultimate bully.
Whatever it proceeds to force into happening this way is tainted.
You flawed fallen creatures. Do you really not see the logs in your own eyes?
Last edited by Ronin; 07-03-2014 at 01:49 PM.
Unrelated, yet related post:
In Japan, there was a no-boys-allowed Sailor Moon event. Although, guys could get in if they came as a friend with a woman. I completely understood why they did that. Japan is notorious for the otaku culture. They were also deeply affected by a particular otaku that collected anime and loli shit. He kidnapped little girls, dismembered them, ate them, etc.
Sailor Moon is an anime, and I can imagine the event could have had creepy otaku there. I mean, guys could have easily gone as long as they had a female to escort them there. If you don't have a female friend, well, then you probably are a creepy otaku.
i got used to it after the third day we played D3 together :P .
My argument still holds because 1. equal screen time is not a law, 2. female players are allowed in the NFL, 3. discrimination based on sex is illegal in the US.Do you really think that the law gives hold to an argument, that the female NFL in the US which was only founded in 2000 is required to be given equal screen time to the male competition (I am not asking anyone's opinions here, but what the law thinks about this question). No? Well in that case what you said about the law doesn't hold.
Yes, all sports have different divisions for men and women, but why? Because of how we are physically built differently, this has NOTHING to do with physical fitness, nor does it have to do with any sort of physical contact. Don't get me wrong, I have no interest in this and it'll just spur up more feminist bullshit, but you have to admit it seems a little random and unnecessary.
You think you really could sue your way in? Gimme a break.
Do you really think a guy could sue some T&A mag into printing his pics on the basis that it's unfair if they only print girls?
All that this sex discrimination thing amounts to in fact is 2 things:
- Equal standing in front of the law
- Some stuff in labor law, mainly about hiring and firing.
No one can force unisex toilets on you...
This is kinda the idea:
Guys would win everything, if they could find a way into female sports competition.
Last edited by Ronin; 07-03-2014 at 07:00 PM.
Is it retarded to have female and male split divisions in gaming competitions? Sure.
I mean, I can't really think of a single reason why you'd have one, and especially not one that looks as arbitrary as the one from that article(I mean, why the hell is SF all guys, while Tekken all girls?).
The only argument I can think of to rationalize the event set-up, would be something like the organizers not wanting uni-sex tournaments due to possible friction between the genders(not wanting a situation where sexual harassment is likely to happen etc.), and then picking what games to assign to which gender based on statistics of popularity of each game in relation to each respective gender.
That being said, it seems like a pretty thoughtless move. Honestly, I'm just kinda nonplussed.
Is it sexism though? Honestly, can't say. I don't like to throw the term around the way most people seem to do nowadays, and I certainly don't accept the definition used in "academical" feminist "theories", but it's quite possible that this situation is caused by backwards sexist attitudes.
It could also just be regular stupidity.
It might very well be that you have a bunch of idiots who really think "e-sports"(another term I hate) becomes more sports-like if you throw in gender divisions.
Seriously though, this entire situation is just stupid. Just make everything uni-sex and be done with it.
The Common Sense United Front
ZAZAZAZAAAA, DADADADAAAA DAAAA, SHWAMSHWAMSHWAMMMM DUUUU DIIIII DAAAAAAAAAA
Too much agreement kills a chat.