Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Bregma

Member Since 09 Dec 2005
Online Last Active Today, 10:38 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

Today, 10:38 AM

 

 

The term and nature:- feminism can't be eradicated.
Feminism means something. Masculism means something. And these are governed by hormones (note feminism doesn't mean all women as masculism also doesn't mean all men)

 
There is no such thing as a feminist.  There's just normal people and bigots.  It quickly becomes obvious which one one is.

 

So, a person that thinks women and men should be equals and have equal political and economic power, something that at this point in time is not true, but also believes that women as individuals can be sexist against men, and prejudice against anyone, even against "white males", is not justified, is...what? Are they "normal"(???) or bigots?

 

A person that thinks women should be equal to men is a bigot, yes.  That sentence itself is an example of "begging the question" because it has the built-in a priori assumption that being a man is the gold standard by which all things are measured and women are either not as good as or at the very most equal to men, by nature of their sex.  The English word for that is "discrimination."  Someone who says men and women are equals, however is not a bigot.  It's a subtlety.  That subtlety is important.  I can tell I've already lost most of the people on this thread.
 
Someone who thinks there are only human rights and responsibilities is a normal person. If you believe there are "women's rights" and "gay rights" and "minority rights" then you're being bigoted.  Every single one of those issues dubbed as "${adjective} rights" are fundamentally human rights and only distinguished by their casual denial by a self-appointed societal elite, usually in an effort to preserve some sort of privilege or entitlement (aka "the system").  Rights are rights, and only in their denial is there a problem.  In fact, any time you see someone called for "${adjective} rights" what they're calling for is actually an end to the systematic denial of human rights to the ${adjective}s.
 
It's true that there are groups of people who actively seek to deny rights to others on the basis of perceived or actual membership in a social group.  As a society, we have a long and sordid history of that. In the 1860s, the USA found an internecine war over the right to deny freedom to others, just as an example.  Left to their own devices, the jerks always seem to dominate and few will deny we have a long way to go before the ideal of true human equality is reached.  So, yeah, we're in agreement there's a problem.  I don't think we're in agreement that the case is that women need special treatment; it's my belief that the people who deny the basic human rights need to admit they have a problem and change their expectations of entitlement.
 
Oh, and there's no argument that there are extremists in all directions.  The extremists are actually not really the problem.
 

Also, feminists would be happy to know there's no such thing as feminism, I guess?

You might find it instructive to listen to a "feminist" some time. I mean listen, with an intent to understand, and not just think about your defence arguments while the other person is talking.  Here's a start: where do you think I got the "no such thing as a feminist" from?  Here is a relatively painless editorial piece to start with.  I know for some of you there's a lot of printing and your lips will get tired out from reading it, but if you're not one of those guys then do make an effort. 

 

Seriously, there's a widely acknowledged problem with keeping certain groups of people out of the software (and in particular game development) industry.  Most of the posters on this thread seem to be enthusiastic about demonstrating how they are contributors to the problem, but it's everyone's responsibility to help solve the problem.  Everyone.  It's not a women's issue.  It's our issue.


In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

Today, 04:33 AM

The term and nature:- feminism can't be eradicated.

Feminism means something. Masculism means something. And these are governed by hormones (note feminism doesn't mean all women as masculism also doesn't mean all men)

 

There is no such thing as a feminist.  There's just normal people and bigots.  It quickly becomes obvious which one one is.


In Topic: Is there a way to change initialisation order while keeping object layout ?

Yesterday, 06:39 AM

The committee had to choose some rule for initialization order.  The chose the one that will work reliably under all situations:  with the presence of explicit initialization or without.    I suppose the could have gone with "in the order of explicit initialization except when some explicit initializers are missing in which case you fall back to member declaration order and except when there is non-virtual multiple inheritance with differing base class constructor calls and also not in plain-old-data copy constructors or any classes derived from them and, well, there is no guarantee about default copy operators ever doing the right thing any more" but my guess is they thought that might be a little more error-prone and liable to unexpected behaviour.


In Topic: my C++ console 3D fps Game on Windows from scratch

20 May 2016 - 12:37 PM

Now translate it into ANSI escape sequences and provide it on a port you can telnet to.

In Topic: My C++ gotcha of the day

20 May 2016 - 12:29 PM

Huh. Any idea what SFINAE stands for? It should be a clue as to why it's unreasonable to expect an error in that situation.

Sure do, and it was an "Aha! That makes sense"-moment after I found out. Saying I expected an error was probably wrong, but I sure didn't think of this as even a possibility for this error.

I'd go as far as saying that's yet another good example of why macros are bad practice in C++ code.

PARTNERS