Gender again. Sorry!

[multitool]

From the poster who has made a habit of attacking the way people who disagree with you post I will take that as a compliment from an expert in the field. I have never, nor will ever, claim the moral superiority implied by throwing out descriptions such as fascist at people whose views I dislike. I may have a view that people who do are a pita, but, while that may just be my pomposity, I am not sure that qualifies as the correct meaning of sanctimony.

I will reply to posts on the increasingly rare occasions when I believe my contributions add to the discussion or are not going round in the same point-scoring circles. As I have got older I am ever more aware of my fallibility in being able or qualified to judge the moral right in many situations, and prefer to leave it to those people who are so sure they have all the answers to the evils of the world that they can throw around the isms at the drop of a hat on internet forums.

So, nothing to add in topic then. Just more sanctimony and pomposity.

 

[icowden]

Ah, 'virtue signalling', that rhetorical device to impute selfish and vain motives to people's words. It is by definition an ad hominem.
How do you know they don't really mean it and are in bad faith?

Because they didn't review the game which is what they do. They wrote a morality essay about JK Rowling (who had very little to do with the game other than the property rights) and didn't even look at the game.

 

[Rusty Nails]

So, nothing to add in topic then. Just more sanctimony and pomposity.

It was a response to your post, which was also adding nothing to the topic.

What question do you want to ask on the topic that has not been asked or responded to a hundred times already?

 

[winjim]

Because they didn't review the game which is what they do. They wrote a morality essay about JK Rowling (who had very little to do with the game other than the property rights) and didn't even look at the game.

Have you read it? It does look at the game, but it's also about the trans/queer experience. It is an essay perhaps more than a game review but it's an interesting read. They're very clear about how they can't and won't separate the art from the artist but they talk about the effect that reading the books had and their thoughts about the subsequent situation. If we're trying to understand other peoples perspective and stimulate our own thoughts then it's a worthwhile piece.

https://www.wired.com/review/hogwarts-legacy-review/

 

[AuroraSaab]

Ah, 'virtue signalling', that rhetorical device to impute selfish and vain motives to people's words. It is by definition an ad hominem.

How do you know they don't really mean it and are in bad faith?

Because they haven't given 1 out of 10 ratings to the latest offerings from Activision, Riot Games, or Ubisoft, or gone back and re-rated their games, despite allegations of sexual harassment at these companies and them having to pay out millions in settlements. They obviously felt that sexism in the game industry wasn't worth taking such a stance over.

They could have published an opinion piece but to put that out as their official review of the game is a bit ridiculous.

 

[multitool]

It was a response to your post, which was also adding nothing to the topic.

What question do you want to ask on the topic that has not been asked or responded to a hundred times already?

And my response was to your post which just accused people posting of sanctimonious. Tone policing.

From your lofty position perhaps you'd care to tell these sanctimonious posters where they are going wrong and post on the topic accordingly. Or you could just, you know...not post.

 

[multitool]

Because they didn't review the game which is what they do. They wrote a morality essay about JK Rowling (who had very little to do with the game other than the property rights) and didn't even look at the game.

'Virtue signalling' implies bad faith. How do you know they are in bad faith?

Do you think there is something wrong with somebody having a value system and sticking to it?

 

[Rusty Nails]

And my response was to your post which just accused people posting of sanctimonious. Tone policing.

From your lofty position perhaps you'd care to tell these sanctimonious posters where they are going wrong and post on the topic accordingly. Or you could just, you know...not post.

I've already told you.

Oh, the irony.

 

[multitool]

I've already told you.

Oh, the irony

You haven't told me anything other than you don't know what the word 'fascism' means and you've nothing useful to say about anything.

You seemed to be saying, in an earlier post, that age had taught you to keep quiet, but you then go on to disprove it.

 

[Rusty Nails]

You haven't told me anything other than you don't know what the word 'fascism' means and you've nothing useful to say about anything.

This little tit-for-tat is boring me to tears so lord knows what it is doing to other posters.

I'll say no more on your sanctimony (or mine) and am content to leave others to make their minds up.

 

[multitool]

Nobody asked you in the first place you utter bell

 

[Ian H]

This is three years old and some of you might well have already read it. It's also long and closely argued.

View: https://pennyred.medium.com/terf-wars-why-transphobia-has-no-place-in-feminism-60d3156ad06e

 

[icowden]

'Virtue signalling' implies bad faith. How do you know they are in bad faith?

What @AuroraSaab said. They have never done it for any other game. It doesn't necessarily imply bad faith either.

Definition:-

the public expression of opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or social conscience or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue.

Thus the whole article is virtue signalling and failing to be a software review.

Do you think there is something wrong with somebody having a value system and sticking to it?

No. Do you think that is the case with Wired? Here's a review of GTA5, a game that revolves around committing crime and murdering people:-
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/gtav-ps4
Scored 10/10.

The main ethical issue in games like the GTA series is how crime, torture, violence, hate speech, and sexism are glorified.

 

[multitool]

No. Do you think that is the case with Wired? Here's a review of GTA5, a game that revolves around committing crime and murdering people:-
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/gtav-ps4
Scored 10/10.

Its a review from 2014. Hardly current, unlikely to be same author and editorial team. Besides, 9 years ago things were different with regards to being a tolerant society. I genuinely wouldn't view it as a reasonable comparator.

Perhaps, also, people recognise the ascendence of the far-right, often through the back door with entryism into feminism, as well as the more overt anti immigrant activity. More obliquely misogynistic attitudes are on the rise with the views of people like Andrew Tate reaching millions.It might be that people see a moral prerogative that perhaps wasn't there a decade ago pre-Brexit, pre Tory extremism.

 

[multitool]

16 year old transgender girl stabbed to death in targeted attack.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...Cheshire-park-police-launch-murder-probe.html