lol - no....

me·di·oc·ri·ty
a person of mediocre ability.
plural noun: mediocrities.

It's what happens when we celebrate something or someone for doing the bare minimum for what is expected.
It's like that participation trophy that all kids get at the game, even when their team lost. Making people feel special for not having done anything to deserve it.

I like russians
I like russians
Half the world is what their country spans
They like red and they're hairy and they're not "muricans"

I like russians
I like russians
You never see them having tans
They drink vodka, make caviar, and are hockey fans

I like russian food
As long as the waiter's not nude
It's made from potatoes that they grow all their lives
The girls are quite pretty and make great trophy wives

(and so on)

We have decided? When did we have this decision? Because it's pretty much an assumption that we all feel that we are better off if our neighbor's children go to college, etc. The road bit is a terrible example, because even if you don't own a car, you use the roads or some other part of transportation that road taxes aid with. I don't feel that I should have to pay for other people's fuckups and I am not the only one to feel that way, by far. If you smoke all your life and then don't have insurance when the cancer comes around, maybe you should have made some other life decisions. If you screw around and get someone pregnant, it isn't my family's responsibility to fix your mistake. If you feel differently, then we are probably going to continue to disagree on everything else.

The numbers are the average of gross monthly income, before taxes. They have less purchasing power because they have far more money removed towards their taxes and because they have a VAT. The local purchasing power is going to vary due to cost of living in each state being different. For instance, the cost of living where I live is much higher than the rest of the state, while the state overall cost of living is less than some other states, such as California.

I am not playing with numbers or inventing facts, just listing what information could be found by simple google searches. As far as the top 5 bottom 5 bit, I can tell you the average middle class family income in 2014 was 4250 US dollars a month gross. This is the average for the entire middle class, which while declining due to various factors is still larger than the upper and lower class in the country.

I am not outraged and indignant for them, I am defending the facts. The fact is that for all they have, they pay through the nose. The fact is that they have a CULTURAL idiosyncrasy that allows them to be happy with being perfectly equal with everyone else, it is the only way a system like this can make someone happy. Do you not grasp that there is almost no single way to get ahead in a society like Norway's? You have to be identical to everyone else. If your idea of happiness is going to a dead end job, working 40 hours, coming home and not being able to do much because you don't have discretionary income, paying for others to not work hard, etc, then by all means move to Norway. Just be careful if you do, because they really don't like paying for immigrants to have free stuff. In fact, they recently had someone get quite violent over it.

I was raised to believe that if you put more effort in that another person, you should be recognized for that effort and get ahead accordingly. Does this mean I agree with CEO salaries? I do not, but that is a different discussion. What I was not raised to believe in is that, if you simply put in the minimum effort, you should get a medal or trophy for just competing. That is bullshit and counter-intuitive to the way the world actually works. If that was actually possible, Darwin would have had a wildly different theory about natural selection.

@Asmo

Except my daughter doesn't want to play other games--she wants to play Mario Brothers games. They have excellent game and level design. Why should she have to go elsewhere? Are you trying to say Mario Brothers games not for girls?

All my daughter is asking is to be allowed to play as the Princess--maybe after you free her from Bowser. That doesn't seem like much to ask, as it would have exactly zero effect on gameplay.

Personally, I'd go much farther and say when a game series continuously sends the message that women are helpless victims who need to be defended by men, when they're continuously objectified as trophies to be passed from player to villain and back to player again, then something is very wrong with that game and things need to change. Yeah, other games may be great, but why should that prevent people like Sarkeesian or myself from pointing out the games that aren't? Why should the trend itself not be pointed out when we can find examples of it outside of the Mario series?

No, it's not required that every game have a male/female playable character. It is, however, good business sense not to insult potential female customers of a product by portraying females (playable characters or NPCS) in sexist ways (or homosexual characters in bigoted ways, or ethnic minority characters in racist ways, while we're on the topic). This doesn't seem very difficult to understand and clearly game companies DO understand it because most are making great efforts to be diverse and more realistic in their portrayals of characters. However, just because some are trying doesn't mean we shouldn't point out the bullshit in those that don't. Games like the Mario platformer series, for instance.

You disagree with the way Sarkeesian presents her message... okay. I don't have a problem with that. I think everything you wrote grossly misrepresents what she's saying about games and gamers, but you're entitled to your opinion there.

Moving on... sorry you felt insulted. That was never my intent. But your comments on this issue are written in an extremely emotional manner as if you've somehow been personally wronged. If you don't want people to take it in that manner, you might want to think carefully about the tone your posts on this topic take. I have no idea what that link you provided was supposed to prove, so I'll just leave it alone.

On "Damsel in Distress," it's "your trope" because you've been--throughout this thread--defending it as if it is some bastion of literature that must be preserved. You are quite literally the only person I've ever seen actually try to defend it. And as I said, if it is that dear to you, you can have it. Games will still get made using it.

Other media,though, have long since moved on from it. Take the movie Die Hard as an example. Yeah, the main character's wife gets taken hostage by terrorists and that provides a nice emotional hook to move the plot forward--damsel in distress, right? If it were a game, though, we never would have heard from Holly Gennarro McClane again until Bruce Willis killed all the terrorists. Or maybe a video recording of her would show up after every "boss fight" where she tells John McClane, "Sorry honey, but I'm being kept in another part of the building."

But that's not what happens is it? The character of Holly is central to the plot of the movie and she appears nearly as much as John McClane does. She tries actively to subvert the terrorists by hiding her true identity and by taking responsibility to make sure the hostages are treated well during their captivity.

In other words she's portrayed as a real human being with personal agency throughout the movie.

And that's the point that you seem to be missing. That doesn't happen often in games despite the fact that it does happen in every other form of media (or at least in the examples from media that we generally consider "good"). When we are talking about the "Damsel in Distress" trope in games, THAT is what is being critiqued. Not the fact that someone was kidnapped to provide an emotional hook, but that one particular gender is always targeted and--to add insult to injury--is presented as weak, helpless, and without any agency of their own. They exist for the sole purpose of being rescued.

Thanks for the pro tip, BTW. Had no idea you were a pro at being a patronizing git but I'll take your word for it.

I thought the solution was rather obvious, actually.

You fix things by making games where people are portrayed as... people. Not trophies to be acquired, not sexual objects to be drooled over, and not stereotypes.

You couple that with continued criticism of games that continue to rely on sexist, racist, or homophobic tropes.

And guess what? That's already happening. People have been saying that games need to change for a while before Sarkeesian showed up. Bioware acknowledged the issues and started trying to include more realistic characters in its RPGs years ago--and caught flak for it even back then.

To address your other... points?

My daughter asked me the other day why she can't play as the princess in Super Mario Galaxy 2 (or any of the other Mario games we own). And I had to tell her it's because the Princess got kidnapped. Her response was to ask if she could play as the Princess once we freed her from Bowser. And I had to tell her no.

There is something wrong with that!

After having that conversation with my daughter I fired up Torchlight, where I'm currently playing as a Vanquisher. Vanquisher's are rogue-like ranged characters and can only be female. If you want to be a warrior ("Destroyer" in game terms) or magic user ("Alchemist" in game terms), sorry--it's a men's only club. And not only that, but Vanquisher's--regardless of the armor they wear, must bare their midriff and wearing a mini-skirt showing lots of leg and cleavage (do a google image search for Torchlight Vanquisher to see what I'm talking about). Apparently you can't be a Vanquisher without being a sex pot too.

There is something wrong with that! (To be fair, they got better with Torchlight II and allowed any class to be any gender and allowed the women to cover up with armor OR choose to be sexy).

Society doesn't just change by itself. You're right, society is becoming more accepting of diversity--because people are fighting very hard for it.

Take America's attitude towards homosexuality. Look at the strides made in the last 20 years. That didn't just magically happen. There were TV shows that portrayed homosexuals as human beings worthy of respect. There were lawsuits. There were marches and protests. There were speeches. There were YouTube campaigns like "It gets better." A lot of people worked fucking hard to get the message out that bigotry is not okay.

Look, I'm sorry people pointing out to you how fucked up it is how women are sometimes portrayed in games is somehow ruining your ability to enjoy games. But there are serious problems here. Maybe not problems for you, but problems for people like my daughter.

The solution to these problems is not to lambast the people pointing them out. Nor is the solution to sit back and do nothing and hope it all works out for the best. One solution, as I've already stated, is to be openly critical of the messages contained in ALL media (including games). Another solution is to be vocal about the need for more realistic and diverse portrayals of people in ALL media (including games).

You can still have your Damsel/Dude in Distress trope, by the way. I have no doubt lazy developers will continue to use it as a substitute for meaningful story. Just don't expect people not to call out the utter absurdity of it, is all I'm saying.

Reluctantly crouched at the starting line,
Engines pumping and thumping in time.
The green light flashes, the flags go up.
Churning and burning, they yearn for the cup.
They deftly maneuver and muscle for rank,
Fuel burning fast on an empty tank.
Reckless and wild, they pour through the turns.
Their prowess is potent and secretly stearn.
As they speed through the finish, the flags go down.
The fans get up and they get out of town.
The arena is empty except for one man,
Still driving and striving as fast as he can.
The sun has gone down and the moon has come up,
And long ago somebody left with the cup.
But he's driving and striving and hugging the turns.
And thinking of someone for whom he still burns.

He's going the distance.
He's going for speed.
She's all alone (All alone!)
All alone in her time of need.
Because he's racing and pacing and plotting the course,
He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse,
He's going the distance.

No trophy, no flowers, no flashbulbs, no wine,
He's haunted by something he cannot define.
Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse,
Assail him, impale him with monster-truck force.
In his mind, he's still driving, still making the grade.
She's hoping in time that her memories will fade.
Cause he's racing and pacing and plotting the course,
He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse.
The sun has gone down and the moon has come up,
And long ago somebody left with the cup.
But he's striving and driving and hugging the turns.
And thinking of someone for whom he still burns.

Cause he's going the distance.
He's going for speed.
She's all alone (All alone!)
All alone in her time of need.
Because he's racing and pacing and plotting the course,
He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse.
He's racing and pacing and plotting the course,
He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse.
He's going the distance.
He's going for speed.
He's going the distance.

Wow, just wow.

Where is there any proof of this? Find me one type I diabetic who eliminated their diabetes without a pancreatic transplant, and I'll give them the world's greatest human trophy.

So far, ever in the history or medicine, no one has had their type I diabetes eliminated by belief. Please show me where this has happened and I'll say you're right. Again, I'm a Type I, and I take very good care of myself. I have poor genetics, which caused cancer in my saliva glands, but it was poor genes, not a poor life style.

The only time I've been in a hospital was for the diagnosis of diabetes and the surgeries for cancer. Aside from those three incidents, I lead a damn great and healthy life style. Where in your theory did I get my illness from. Science tells me it was poor genes and mutations, the second cancer was from the radiation to treat the first one. A risk I had to take into account.

Where do you get your information from? It is flawed and not based in reality. It's that kind of decision making that makes the world a dangerous place.

If you're going to make a claim like that, even when it flies in the face of logic and reason, you better have some damn good proof to back it up.

For someone who has admitted to being too much of a pansy to kill his own supper, you exhibit an enormous understanding of what goes through the head of someone that enjoys such a hobby.

I've got a story for you. When I was a child, I lived in a rural community full of hunters. Not my family. My parents taught me to love and respect animals. We had a couple of dogs I loved dearly. If stray cats showed up at our door, we fed them and gave them attention. If an animal was injured, we nursed it back to health. In school there were a small group of boys who came from a family of hunters. They were taught to hunt from a very young age and animals had no value to them, other than to be enjoyed as a meal. They would torture animals for the fun of it...throw rocks at the birds and squirrels to score points, stomp on them to finish them off and then skin them so they would have their trophies. They would pull the legs off live frogs. Pour gasoline on defenseless little animals and light them on fire. They got off on making animals squeal and would brag about it to whoever would listen. They also bullied kids at school. They didn't feel any empathy and got a rush from inflicting pain and making children cry and scream. One day I was walking home from school and saw the boys with a gas can. They had cornered a feral cat that I had been feeding and were about to light it on fire. I intervened which led to a violent confrontation and thankfully the cat got away. I hollered for a neighbor to help which scared them off but I still ended up being beaten quite badly. When I got home, one of my dogs was missing. We couldn't find him for days. I later found his charred remains in the adjoining forest to my property.

In case anyone was wondering, my user name "carnivorous" is a long standing pet name given to me by my wife (don't ask). I am not a vegetarian, I eat well balanced meals and have a garden where we grow a lot of our own vegetables and my wife bakes bread and other baked goods on a regular basis. We do make an effort to eat less meat and find other sources of protein such as beans, eggs, nuts and cheese, but when we do eat meat we don't let any of it go to waste and appreciate the animals who lost their lives for our meal. As I stated previously in the thread, I am not opposed to hunting if an animal is killed humanely for the sole purpose of providing food and I would prefer that an animal had a glorious life in the wild, ending in a quick and painless death. The issue I have with shang is not about the hunting, but his enjoyment of the violence associated with hunting and what he is teaching his children about violence and aggression. My children have beautiful innocent little hearts and care about the feelings of people, animals and even insects and I am proud of how I've raised them.

Think me a bully if you will but I have always been the sort that stands up for what I believe in and I will not apologize for that.

You have no idea how scary freedom is boy. Who's going to stop me from slicing you up and using you as fertilizer? I'll take your head and feet as trophies and use the rest of you as sausage for my dogs.

Oh... I see, you'll ask a government to do that for ya, will ya? Good luck with that. You might not get caught in my traps, so long as that government is interested in you, which it's not. Com'on down my way son... we'll show ya what gummin't is all about.

I could've caught him...

I may or may not have a trophy for catching a pig. Well tackling actually.

You're correct I can't argue with that, he isn't a good guy by any means. I think taking away all his trophies and him being shunned hardcore by society is punishment enough. However my concern is the society itself, which I think is sick if it accepts this as one of the great crimes and ignores other crimes. It's nothing new, it's just fucking upsetting man, to see this on the news instead of serious shit that matters.

He did pay a price. He lost all his trophies that he won, to me that is the price you pay for cheating in a sport. A sport, that doesn't fucking matter. Yet we bring athletes in front of a Senate commission, and when they lie we try to throw them in jail? What happens when a President lies? What happens when a General lies? What happens when a Bankster lies?

You see this is the problem I have, people are disproportionately passionate about Armstrong or Barry Bonds cheating at a sport. Yet when people do serious harm in the world, kill people or risk the continuation of our species, nothing significant happens.

So no I don't give a shit, Armstrong did nothing wrong. He didn't kill anyone, he didn't poison the planet, he didn't throw children out on the streets to be homeless. He won some stupid little jerseys, and people care more about that then their own lives. It's pathetic, we deserve our fate.

Trophy is the cats name, right..?

So when does Red bull get their best viral marketing ever trophy?