mantlepiecek said:
Women are "objectified" by their will. They choose it, men have absolutely no control over whether to objectify them or not. I don't get why they choose to dance if it is so harmful or offensive to the female population? I get that you are not offended and I agree that maybe it is not the right place in a GDC, but I am talking about your double standards that if a man were to do it it would be different to a woman. Maybe there are tons of advantages for being a dude, but again, most people can't do anything about it. It is still not a reason to have double standards. There is however nothing stopping women from doing what they want in this day and age, by the way. "Again, do you really think it's a double standard to be mad when Michael Richards calls a black guy a Nigger, but not get upset when Chris Rock calls a white guy a cracker? If so... you REALLY need to reevaluate your priorites. " Yes? It is still a double standard. If you don't want people to insult black people then don't support or tolerate insults against the white either. I am talking about people in third person. It is upto the person who got insulted to be offended in the first place. The remaining population should be on the same platform on this issue. |
... no they aren't? Are you kidding?
Also... with the bolded.... seriously dude? What's wrong with you.
Louis CK puts it best....
To use a different sort of example giving one person penacilin and another person something else because they're allergic to penacilin isn't a double standard.
Context 100% matters.
Nigger is worse then cracker, because nigger has hundreds of years of negative conotations. Cracker... has zero connotations behind it.
Wanting to eat one of these pieces of pizza and not the other isn't a double standard.
