People Worked Up Over Mr. Game N Watch

[GhaudePhaede010]

thegamerpad said:

GhaudePhaede010 said:

That is a silly argument. At no point did he say he was upset by it.

 

Also, if people are offended that (your example), especially Romans (or even Italians), then who would I be to tell them they are incorrect to be upset over something they feel misrepresents their culture or values? The bigger question would be, "should I be upset that people are upset over something that they find offensive" because not everything on Earth will offend me. But that does not mean other people that are offended should be ignored because I am not offended.

Playing the "if people" offended is never going to work because there will always be people offended on either side.   Some Native Americans are offended at the constant removal of their likeness from things such as this.   You have to go more by a majority if anything, not just because 2% of people find something offensive we must appease them.   

Also, do we have any evidence/proof that it was actual native americans being offended?  Or was it some white guilt resetEra members trying to tell native americans they should be offended?    

An Indian Head-dress/feather is not a misrepresentation any more than a Laurel wreath is for roman.

What you posted here makes no sense. None at all. But then again, I expect nothing less from people that try to tell other people what is and is not acceptable to be offended by. You see, where you have it wrong is right there. I have the right to be offended by anything I feel offended by (genuinely). For example, I was offended by Trump's, "grab em by the pussy" line. However, you may not have been. Some women were offended by that. Others were not. Those that are offended should be allowed to express their feelings just the same as those who are not offended. I can be offended and subsequently you have the right to not be offended by it just the same. Ultimately, I am allowed to speak my mind and you are as well. It is up to the powers that be to make a decision to change things or not and it is up to you and I to decide how we will progress based on those decisions. But telling someone they cannot be offended or that they should not express their opinion is as ludicrous to me as your view of those that voice their opinion are to you. And that is what your initial post attempted to do by asking that question. It was a, "if you are not offended by this, you cannot be offended by that (anything)" type of question. Which is silly. The world is bigger than just one man's opinion.

You ultimately are pushing for people to not express themselves and use their freedom of speech which is totally incorrect. I have no idea who is really upset over it. I would think, just like with any large group, there will be some people that are and other people that are not offended by it. But I am not going to ignore those that are offended because some people are not offended. That is cherrypicking. I believe ultimately, everyone should be allowed to voice how they feel and then leave the decision to the company or powers that be. Being told not to speak how you feel is oppression and I am adamantly against that no matter which group of people are upset (Native Americans, sjw's, adversaries to each of those groups, or otherwise).

Last edited by GhaudePhaede010 - on 08 November 2018