Spring RTS Engine

.

Sangue wrote:

nemppu wrote:

Sangue wrote: Nowhere in that, or my other posts, did I say all men want to go out and shoot people and have wars.

u know liek boyz like to shoot in war games u know wtih u haev 1st person and gun u shoot ther people its like totaly speaks for if that when are man want its instinct to go man war to shoto ppl its rly dangerus also to shoot but its insticnt many go to war also

I feel a need to try and translate all of that just so I can try to make soem sense of it.

"You know, boys like to shoot in war games. You have one person and a gun and you shoot other people. It totally speaks for the man's instinct to go to war and shoot people. It's really dangerous to shoot, but also an instinct to go to war."

I think I got it all as best as I could.

But, at any rate, I figure it's just a language barrier (or trolling, I can't say yet)...however, yes I suppose some men feel an instinct to go to war and shoot up things and people...but I don't feel all of them are that way. If they were, we'd probably have a good bit more soldiers in the military factions of the world, after all.

nemppu's trolling.

The only reason he hasn't been banned yet is that his trolling mildly amuses SwiftSpear.

I guess that's just what sort of forum we have here. Mods allow trolling. Mods encourage trolling. Trolling occurs. QED.

On the subject... while your views are appreciated, Sangue, they add precisely zero to the discussion. While you may be used to being able to say "I'm a woman, I believe this, therefore women believe this" on the Internets, because women are rare, it isn't anywhere close to an actual argument. Plenty of women want to be able to be considered equally with men in the military. Plenty of men don't want anything to do with wars or fighting. Neither stereotyping nor personal anecdotes provide insights into the merits of the issues.

If the call arises, I will go to war.

Weapons fascinate me. Humans dug metals from the ground and molded them into engines of destruction, this also fascinates me. Tactics, strategies and command also fascinate me. However, being an armchair strategist/general does not fascinate me. (Games are an exception, since they take place in unrealistic arenas of combat with unrealistic forces) I am not sure what I would've done in many great leaders places. We have the gift of hindsight, and that is already a bias towards us making a better choice than the leader would have, however, if we didn't have this hindsight, we would blindly follow and say it's the greatest plan ever.

Women are more emotional. It is a fact. Women who see so much death and destruction can't mentally shrugg it off as well as someone as apathetic and uncaring as I am. I didn't shed a tear when a loved one died, why would I shed one for someone I don't know?

Women are perhaps better suited to be assassins or spies, especially if they are flirtacious/slutty, but know how to keep within bounds. All men know what we want... >__>

I'm not saying I would enjoy blowing people like myself's head off. I know that I could if I was threatened myself, or if I had the chance to prevent casualties. I honor soldiers, not neccessarely the old farts that lead them to their death. Young men die for old men's mistakes.

Women have to go through more hell in a perfectly normal life than a guy does. A guy has no need to worry about being raped, unless he is in jail, in which he deserves to be raped. Women bear children, which is undoubtebly painful. There are guys who think women are weaker and inferior in every way, there are sleezy guys, there are date rapists, there are hundreds of things women will have to consistantly worry about that guys have no threat from.

So, yes, weapons are valuable in self defense. Not sure where the war discussion came from.

Just my .02.

Your two cents rather suck, Snipawolf.

As I said, stereotyping about women doesn't help.

If we're going to stereotype genders I could say that men have it rougher, they have to go out and actually work while the women get to stay in the ------- all day.

Obviously that is not a very helpful or insightful thing to say at all.

Sterotyping? Heh.

Perhaps with the assassins and spies thing, but that had a perhaps with it. I am in no way saying all women should be like that, or are like that, because I don't like those kinds of women in the first place. Also, I made a stereotype about how guys want to have sex and breasts.

Men have it rougher, but they don't have anything to worry about. They don't need to be extra cautious, unless they live in a bad area. They don't need to carry weapons on a regular basis (mace and sprays counted as well) because they do not need to worry about any kinds of attacks or threats.

My opinion on weapons is that anyone should be allowed to carry one as long as they are perfectly stable.

Snipawolf wrote:Women are more emotional.

Stereotype.

Women who see so much death and destruction can't mentally shrugg it off as well as someone as apathetic and uncaring as I am.

Stereotype.

Women are perhaps better suited to be assassins or spies, especially if they are flirtacious/slutty, but know how to keep within bounds.

Stereotype.

All men know what we want... >__>

Stereotype.

Women have to go through more hell in a perfectly normal life than a guy does.

Inaccurate broad generalization based on flawed beliefs held by a 15-year-old white male from the suburbs.

There are guys who think women are weaker and inferior in every way, there are sleezy guys, there are date rapists, there are hundreds of things women will have to consistantly worry about that guys have no threat from.

See above.

I had hoped that you would see what I was talking about, but apparently not.

Well thanks for labeling everything I said as sterotype, real good way to dodge me because you can't come back with a decent argument.

Have fun sidestepping? Go ahead. Clearly, I can't debate with you. This "debate" would go back and forth, and no outcome would be decided.

Congratulations... You win.

Snipawolf wrote:Well thanks for labeling everything I said as sterotype, real good way to dodge me because you can't come back with a decent argument.

Have fun sidestepping? Go ahead. Clearly, I can't debate with you. This "debate" would go back and forth, and no outcome would be decided.

Congratulations... You win.

And you continue to completely miss the point.

That sterotypes will not advance this argument? That seems to be your point. If not, clarify it, so that I may be enlightened

Stereotypes are argumentative crutches, they oversimplify complex issues by replacing what little analysis or content there might be with additional opinion. They operate on circular logic; x does y because y is done by x.

Also, while Nempuu's statements are not productive, they are not against policy. He is, in a way, using hyperbole and absurdity to reveal the contextual weakness of generalization, whether intentional or not.

neddiedrow wrote:Also, while Nempuu's statements are not productive, they are not against policy. He is, in a way, using hyperbole and absurdity to reveal the contextual weakness of generalization, whether intentional or not.

This is EXACTLY why I rewrote the default rules on the S44 forums. Having debates about policy leads to what Wikipedia has... full wikicourts with wikilawyers and wikijudges, people file wikibriefs, present wikievidence, and at the end the wikicourt hands out a wikisentence.

It is, of course, fucking ridiculous.

We don't have debates over policy. We have several moderators who don't moderate, a few moderators who are strict constructionists, and a few moderators who make their own laws.

Feminism can be seen as many things, because it is a high-level umbrella concept which is used to generalize a number of very different positions for the sake of argument.

Snipa. Everything you said WAS a stereotype.

Women are more emotional.

No, emotional strenght/weakness are dynamics of personality temperment. I know women who are more emotionally even keeled than I am and I know guys who are more emotionally unstable than my Mom is (and my Mom can be scary)

Women who see so much death and destruction can't mentally shrugg it off as well as someone as apathetic and uncaring as I am.

Depends on the woman. The majority of guys can't necessarily shrug off death and destruction... Post traumatic stress disorder seems to work quite well on men.

Women are perhaps better suited to be assassins or spies, especially if they are flirtacious/slutty, but know how to keep within bounds.

Ugg... ok... I'll grant you that women are generally speaking less psychologically imposing, which in theory could open some doors to them in area's such as "spying and assassinating"... But I mean seriously. Real life is not a James Bond movie.

All men know what we want... >__>

I find this offensive because the last thing I want is to be grouped together with a bunch of dicklead retards. I don't really know "what I want" but if you're implying I want what I think you are you can go jump in a pit you moron. I know for a fact I'm infinitely more happy in a deep platonic relationship than a shallow sexual one.

Women have to go through more hell in a perfectly normal life than a guy does.

This is a misnomer. The average guy with a hard life goes through alot more personal hell than the average woman with an easy life. A child soldier in Africa has experienced more pain and hardship than the sum total of all the women you know most likely. The variation from person to person is so large the statistic might as well be ignored entirely. Childbirth is painful, but many different people experience all kinds of different pain all along their life, males certainly get no exception.

There are guys who think women are weaker and inferior in every way, there are sleezy guys, there are date rapists, there are hundreds of things women will have to consistantly worry about that guys have no threat from.

Sure... but I'd rather be female than Mexican if we're talking about people sociaty constantly looks down on and degrades. Like I've already said, equality isn't finished, and some people are born into better life circumstances simply because of the temporal effects of sociaty shifting in the most slow and painless way possible. That doesn't degrade the fact that the effects are still relative.

On the subject... while your views are appreciated, Sangue, they add precisely zero to the discussion. While you may be used to being able to say "I'm a woman, I believe this, therefore women believe this" on the Internets, because women are rare, it isn't anywhere close to an actual argument. Plenty of women want to be able to be considered equally with men in the military. Plenty of men don't want anything to do with wars or fighting. Neither stereotyping nor personal anecdotes provide insights into the merits of the issues.

Women in finland can volunteer to the army freely, and there are somewhere around 500-1000 women going into the military each year(if they start to regret their choice within 2 weeks of entering service they can leave with no consequences, and a lot of them do leave during the first few weeks)

Those who stay usually never have any intention to become cannon fodder but instead strive to become officers

My opinion on weapons is that anyone should be allowed to carry one as long as they are perfectly stable.

You are by no standard mentally stable enough to join military mr john rambo.

If the call arises, I will go to war.

Weapons fascinate me. Humans dug metals from the ground and molded them into engines of destruction, this also fascinates me.

I am not sure what I would've done in many great leaders places. We have the gift of hindsight, and that is already a bias towards us making a better choice than the leader would have

Women who see so much death and destruction can't mentally shrugg it off as well as someone as apathetic and uncaring as I am. I didn't shed a tear when a loved one died, why would I shed one for someone I don't know?

Women are perhaps better suited to be assassins or spies, especially if they are flirtacious/slutty, but know how to keep within bounds.

im sorry about the john rambo labeling, it should've been more like james fucking bond in golden eye

basically everything you said above is more than good enough reason to hand you C-papers (relieved from draft, mentally handicapped)

Well thanks for labeling everything I said as sterotype, real good way to dodge me because you can't come back with a decent argument.

Its not that everything you said is too good to be counter argumented, but rather than its too retarded.

nemppu's trolling.

no you are. stop crying about nemppu and trolling

Felix is uncool

whats so civil about war anyway -- axl rose

I cannot believe mods let blatant troller like isaac loose to troll, someone do something now!

(duderham is isaac)