The Fall State of Decay Kairo State of Decay - Breakdown Steam Store and Retail Key Cloudbuilt Shadowrun Returns L.A. Noire Complete Edition Long Live The Queen Child of Light Batman: Arkham Origins - Season Pass Darksiders II - Death Rides Darksiders 2 - Argul's Tomb Darksiders II - Season Pass Risk of Rain FORCED Hitman Contracts Saints Row IV: Season Pass Lost Planet: Extreme Condition Bleed Betrayer Steam Marlow Briggs Steam Store and Retail Key FINAL FANTASY XIV: A Realm Reborn (NA version and Retail Key) Unepic The Bureau: XCOM Declassified
Quote from: Zekester on June 19, 2014, 06:58:52 PM
we're not living in the 19th century anymore. no one has been using 'redskin' in a derogatory manner.
OK, you seriously must be trolling now. I really hope you are.
It's not that no one uses it in a derogatory manner anymore. It's that no one uses it any more, period, unless they are referring to the football team. Because if they used it in reference to Native Americans it would be extremely offensive.
2. Lynchings, whites only water fountains, and segregation are a far cry from a corporate logo and team name. In fact they're not even in the same ball park. We're not talking about basic human rights here, what we're talking about is hurting people's feelings. It's a slippery slope when the government starts making decisions based off of hurt feelings.
But why should larger groups get the protection of the crowd while smaller groups get left behind? You know if the name poked fun of Christians then this wouldn't stand because of the backlash. But Native Americans don't have the power to create a backlash like that. In those cases, there needs to be someone or some thing to act in their place.
Quote from: forgeforsaken on June 19, 2014, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Scraper on June 19, 2014, 12:50:21 PM
The biggest problem I have with it is that we have a branch of the government deciding what is and isn't "offensive" based on speech. If you guys so clearly want to believe in the free market then why can't the USPTO sit back and watch the trademark wither away because the American people don't buy the products it's associated with? As it stands the people and our free market justify its existence. Sad but true.
Is the name offensive? Sure it is. But why should the government tell us what is and what isn't offensive when it comes to trademarks attached to a product?
The government didn't just decide this on their own, a group of Native Americans brought suit against the trademark, and while our government is a majority rule, it is also tasked with the protection of the minority. Here's Thomas Jefferson on it
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression.
Exactly. Thankfully sometimes in this country we do things because it is the right thing to do instead of waiting for everyone to realize it. If not, women might still not have the right to vote, people would only be able to marry their own race, etc.
Minority has lands forcibly taken from them and thousands of their people killed. Minority is portrayed as savage and uneducated in new society's media for many years. Finally able to educate some people about their past and get representation, minority goes to public and says, "could you at least not name one of your teams in your most popular leagues using a racist term? There are no teams named Wops, Kikes, Nips, Dagos, etc. Do us this one favor."
Freedom loving citizens say, "Whoa! We can't do that! That would be 'Politically Correct,' and that means it's BAD. Suck it up!"
Would it have been PC run amok had they been called the Washington Coons and they had an image of a black slave as their mascot?
This. I mean c'mon. This is like naming them the Washington Slopes with a Chinese person on the helmet, or Washington Wetbacks or Washington Micks or Washington Wops. Those examples you gave have nothing to do with it. The only reason the name has lasted so long is that it references a historically oppressed minority with little voice to complain with.
Caught it tonight. Really any time travel movie at this point I expect the time travel stuff is going to be silly and I just ignore it.
Aside from that these were my questions/problems:
Spoiler for Hiden:
So does this movie essentially wipe away X-Men 1, 2 and 3? We have no idea which of that stuff still happens. It certainly seemed like Jean never had any issues. Magneto is likely still at odds with X, but what of Mystique?
Is Wolverine even Weapon X in this new timeline? Given that Mystique saves him and Xavier knows what Stryker has planned for him, wouldn't they take steps to prevent that?
Did they ever state that time passes quicker in the present? Kitty was clearly not sitting there for the minimum several days that it took for the past to play out. In the comic they didn't need to keep the link up, Kitty was just asleep and they carried her around.
And finally, speaking of Kitty, where did she get the ability to send people into the past? That is not in her power set and I found it really weird. I get they were probably trying to keep Kitty involved as a reference to the comic, but that was weird.
The other thing I wished they had done was put in a whole ton of quick cameos at the school at the end. There are a lot of characters they could have made easily identifiable with costumes like Surge, Rockslide, Anole, X23, Pixie, Dust, etc.
Actually, I had another thought. So in the original xmen movie timeline Trask is killed and Mystique is caught at some point. But there were no Sentinels in the original 3 movies, so they waited from the 70s until some time in the 2000s to get the Sentinel program up and running again even though everyone was supposed to immediately now be frightened of mutants? Mystique was around, so the dissection of Mystique would have to have happened after Last Stand.
Is the next movie supposed to take place after the end of this movie or some time in the past?
It's looking more likely that there won't be another AM3+ socket processor until at least 2015, if ever, so I need to seriously consider moving to Intel. I might not do this until the holidays, but in case I get impulsive, I want to think about what I'll need to do.
First of all, I have an OEM version of Windows, so I believe I'm going to have to buy a new copy, correct? So this will mean wiping my boot drive (SSD), I guess. And since I have Steam game on my secondary drive I'll probably just want to wipe that drive too unless there is way to link up to installed Steam games when you install Steam?
Anything else? I'll obviously have to get a new motherboard, but I don't foresee any compatibility issues there with video card, cd drive, etc.
I liked the demo, but I expect with areas that small, the actual gameplay won't be anywhere near that tactical. I expect people will just be blowing walls open and it will be nonstop gunfire. I suppose they could have designed it to prevent that from happening, but it remains to be seen.
Maybe it was just me but the Sony conference felt surprisingly...gory. The Order, From Software game, Suda game, Mortal Kombat, Dead Island...and that whole Devolver section was just sprites getting gibbed including close ups of Hotline Miami chainsaw decapitation.
Kind of funny thing, changing a traffic light almost always causes a multi-car accident and does a lot of damage to all the cars. I used a traffic light to stop a guy, then got a phone call after I took him down. Cars were exploding all the way through the call
I've been stealing money from a lot of people who probably don't deserve it. Oh well. Interesting that it doesn't effect your reputation in any way.