test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Name was found to be a TOS Violation...now what

1235»

Comments

  • jerax1011jerax1011 Posts: 966 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    How is that size even POSSIBLE?

    body mass max, chest depth and width max and breasts max then have the right chest piece and it's really puts emphasis on it.
    EU5doX8.jpg
    @Aleatha1011 in CO | Keeper of the Cheesecake since Nov. 2011| Bunni BOT is on PRIMUS! | Come check out my deviantart page!
  • flyingfinnflyingfinn Posts: 8,408 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    skcark wrote: »
    Lolwut? How is it sexist?

    Because lots of brave young men lost their lives fighting against dragons, ogres, trolls and warlocks when "helpless" princess' pretented to be in distress.
    Right?
    CHAMPIONS ONLINE:Join Date: Apr 2008
    And playing by myself since Aug 2009
    Godtier: Lifetime Subscriber
    tumblr_n7qtltG3Dv1rv1ckao1_500.gif
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • chaoswolf820chaoswolf820 Posts: 734 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    jerax1011 wrote: »
    body mass max, chest depth and width max and breasts max then have the right chest piece and it's really puts emphasis on it.

    ...duly noted.
  • skcarkskcark Posts: 715 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    It assumes women are weak, frail creatures unable to care for themselves as well as objects to be won through feats of strength.

    I was under the impression it was some medieval word for basically bravery, courtesy and honour etc..


    Would you prefer to have a person hold a door open for you since you're already close enough to go through as they entered through.. or have them slam it shut on your face? =\

    I've been yelled at in the past for such BS as holding a door open with the "i can do it myself you sexist pig" attitude.. because i always hold it open for the person directly behind me, or on the other side and let them through first regardless of gender... which bugs me because if it's to a building to line up to order food... i end up letting them get infront by trying to be polite >.<
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    skcark wrote: »
    I was under the impression it was some medieval word for basically bravery, courtesy and honour etc..


    Would you prefer to have a person hold a door open for you since you're already close enough to go through as they entered through.. or have them slam it shut on your face? =\

    I've been yelled at in the past for such BS as holding a door open with the "i can do it myself you sexist pig" attitude.. because i always hold it open for the person directly behind me, or on the other side and let them through first regardless of gender... which bugs me because if it's to a building to line up to order food... i end up letting them get infront by trying to be polite >.<

    Here's the thing, there's a difference between being polite, like buying a woman a dinner for her birthday, and chivalry where you buy her the dinner because she's a woman. Treating her like she's a lesser being that cannot take care of herself is very much sexist, not honorable nor brave.
  • jonesing4jonesing4 Posts: 800 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Here's the thing, there's a difference between being polite, like buying a woman a dinner for her birthday, and chivalry where you buy her the dinner because she's a woman. Treating her like she's a lesser being that cannot take care of herself is very much sexist, not honorable nor brave.

    No less honorable than determining a man's thought process for him, surely.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    jonesing4 wrote: »
    No less honorable than determining a man's thought process for him, surely.

    There's no other "thought process" when following chivalry. If you're following such a code, you're only reinforcing the stereotype that females are weaker and less capable than men. All it is, is "Fair maiden of the fairer and dainty sex, look how strong and powerful I am for doing you this service. Am I not impressive to you? Am I not kind? Does my strength and power not awe you?"

    No.
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    I thought women got protected because they're more valuable because they can produce children. If anything, men should feel insulted because they're expected to accept the fact that their only worth is as a meat shield to keep the ovaries safe.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    spinnytop wrote: »
    I thought women got protected because they're more valuable because they can produce children. If anything, men should feel insulted because they're expected to accept the fact that their only worth is as a meat shield to keep the ovaries safe.

    They probably should, especially considering that the earlier part of your statement is a lie. A woman can't spontaneously make a child by herself. A man has some part in that too, you know.
  • jonesing4jonesing4 Posts: 800 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    There's no other "thought process" when following chivalry. If you're following such a code, you're only reinforcing the stereotype that females are weaker and less capable than men. All it is, is "Fair maiden of the fairer and dainty sex, look how strong and powerful I am for doing you this service. Am I not impressive to you? Am I not kind? Does my strength and power not awe you?"

    No.

    I had no idea I was being such a turd by buying my woman dinner. Thanks for setting me straight.
  • jonesing4jonesing4 Posts: 800 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    spinnytop wrote: »
    I thought women got protected because they're more valuable because they can produce children. If anything, men should feel insulted because they're expected to accept the fact that their only worth is as a meat shield to keep the ovaries safe.

    I lol'd.

    8910
  • jennymachxjennymachx Posts: 3,000 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Here's the thing, there's a difference between being polite, like buying a woman a dinner for her birthday, and chivalry where you buy her the dinner because she's a woman. Treating her like she's a lesser being that cannot take care of herself is very much sexist, not honorable nor brave.

    Um, I don't see how a guy offering to pay for a dinner date comes off as treating the woman as a lesser being. It can taken as a nice gesture and a way of thanks for the company. Personally I would insist to at the very least to go Dutch, but I certainly wouldn't feel like I'm being treated like a "lesser being" just because the guy offers to pay. If a woman truly feels that way during a date and considers it sexist then there's some ego issue involved.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    jonesing4 wrote: »
    I had no idea I was being such a turd by buying my woman dinner. Thanks for setting me straight.

    All you need to remember is that polite behavior should be universal, not simply because the recipient has a ******. Keep this in mind and you should do just fine. Concerning the dinner issue, maybe occasionally she wants to pay for it to show you kindness. Discuss it, possibly take turns buying or occasionally share the bill. Just don't assume that because she has a ****** that you automatically pay it for her (heck, what if you made less money than she did, who's really the "less capable" one in that scenario?).

    Edit: Really? The V-word is censored?

    2nd Edit:
    jennymachx wrote: »
    Um, I don't see how a guy offering to pay for a dinner date comes off as treating the woman as a lesser being. It can taken as a nice gesture and a way of thanks for the company. Personally I would insist to at the very least to go Dutch, but I certainly wouldn't feel like I'm being treated like a "lesser being" just because the guy offers to pay. If a woman truly feels that way during a date and considers it sexist then there's some ego issue involved.

    It's okay if he's simply being nice, but if he's just doing it because of chivalric tradition that because he's the man and she's the woman so he must pay for her, he's a sexist jerk that needs to learn that women are not helpless waifs.
  • draogndraogn Posts: 1,269 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    They probably should, especially considering that the earlier part of your statement is a lie. A woman can't spontaneously make a child by herself. A man has some part in that too, you know.

    Technically that isn't entirely true any more, it wouldn't be spontaneous or anything. But our science has come up with all sorts of bizarre things for the sake of circumventing the traditional way of living.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    draogn wrote: »
    Technically that isn't entirely true any more, it wouldn't be spontaneous or anything. But our science has come up with all sorts of bizarre things for the sake of circumventing the traditional way of living.

    138760935174.png
  • ashensnowashensnow Posts: 2,048 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Chivalry means knowing how to ride a horse right ?

    Pretty much just as obsolete as that skill for the vast majority of us.

    'Caine, miss you bud. Fly high.
  • jennymachxjennymachx Posts: 3,000 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    ashensnow wrote: »
    Chivalry means knowing how to ride a horse right ?

    Pretty much just as obsolete as that skill for the vast majority of us.

    I thought it was about this:

    img_166285_1.jpg
  • ashensnowashensnow Posts: 2,048 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    jennymachx wrote: »
    I thought it was about this:

    Oddly enough chivalry is actually derived from the Old French word (chevalerie) for horsemanship. Ultimately it originally was a reference to one's position at the top of the military food-chain of the time.

    'Caine, miss you bud. Fly high.
  • jennymachxjennymachx Posts: 3,000 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    ashensnow wrote: »
    Oddly enough chivalry is actually derived from the Old French word (chevalerie) for horsemanship. Ultimately it originally was a reference to one's position at the top of the military food-chain of the time.

    I know, I was just being silly finding an excuse to reference that game (a seriously brutal one too).
  • themightyzeniththemightyzenith Posts: 4,599 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    A culture that encourages men to be "chivalrous" and women to expect it is only perpetuating stereotypes of women as being inherently less capable than men.

    Let's end the outdated code of chivalry and instead focus on promoting courtesy and respect to men and women alike

    Also, don't feed the trolls.

    trollknight.jpg
    zrdRBy8.png
    Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    They probably should, especially considering that the earlier part of your statement is a lie. A woman can't spontaneously make a child by herself. A man has some part in that too, you know.

    You only need 1 man to get a thousand woman pregnant. Hence, yes, the women are more valuable, because all but one of the men is expendable. So... hey look, it wasn't a lie.. as it turns out, women do produce children and men just produce a very small part of the whole process :|
  • jonsillsjonsills Posts: 6,318 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    "Less capable"? The code of chivalry is supposed to be about finding women to be more valuable than men, not less capable. One holds the door for a lady because she deserves the courtesy, not because one does not believe she can hold it herself. One purchases flowers and gifts to show how one values the lady, not because one presumes she can't buy them on her own.

    Now, admittedly, there are those who would claim that they "have" to do these things for women because the poor dears can't; chauvinists have always been with us as well, after all. But there's no need to lump courtesy in with disregard. One might as well throw out gold ore because there's worthless rock in there too.
    "Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"

    - David Brin, "Those Eyes"
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • themightyzeniththemightyzenith Posts: 4,599 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    There are many diverse explanations of the chivalric code and no definitive one, but as I said.......
    Let's end the outdated code of chivalry and instead focus on promoting courtesy and respect to men and women alike
    zrdRBy8.png
    Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
  • skylygerskylyger Posts: 227 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Did my use of the word chivalry really just add 4 more pages to this thread?
  • skylygerskylyger Posts: 227 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    spinnytop wrote: »
    You only need 1 man to get a thousand woman pregnant. Hence, yes, the women are more valuable, because all but one of the men is expendable. So... hey look, it wasn't a lie.. as it turns out, women do produce children and men just produce a very small part of the whole process :|

    Actually a number of amazing advances in science has lead to experiments in creating what amounts to an artificial womb, and with stim cell research a single woman could easily become the source for thousands of offspring.

    However I dont view woman as breeding sows. I view them as the ultimate form of natural art, and frankly have seen, known, and had the sorrow to watch many a lovely lady fall into a self loathing life view due to virtually every other man in their life telling them how worthless they are, how fat they are, how stupid they are, etc etc etc from the time they are small girls. Making it often an impossible task for myself to try and show them how special and worthwhile their simple existence on earth makes it a better place for a man like me to walk upon the surface of it and share a brief moment in time knowing them.

    The code of chivalry is certainly dieing out, and its been replaced by a far more blatant effort to keep womankind feeling downtrodden then anything a white knight would ever do, say, or tolerate in their presence.

    I keep very few male friends in my day to day circle of associates because far too many when a woman is not present takes it as an excuse to talk about women in a most unseemly way, and striking men for speaking ill of women does not make friends with them. I find that a fortunate side effect of it actually.

    Meanwhile I can in simple passing call a girl at a cashier station at a store lovely and revel in the smile it brings to her lips and the light that sets their eyes a glow and if never again do I see them in my life, its still a moment I will forever take pride in.

    Condemn me for wanting to defend a womans honor if you wish. Just know that if you dont wish it, and are in dire straights do not expect aid.
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    skylyger wrote: »
    ~backwards~

    You want to protect women's self esteem? Okay, you'll need to protect them from other women.

    Oh wait... whatever will you do when it's another woman saying the disrespectful things to your woman? :O

    Oh wait but no, women are divine pieces of art and they could never do that sort of thing, that's something human beings do.
  • kemmicalskemmicals Posts: 853 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    How the **** did this go from a complaint about a toon getting generic'd to sexism and chivalry?

    Can we please leave the social justice bull on Tumblr?
  • themightyzeniththemightyzenith Posts: 4,599 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Don't feed the troll, folks
    zrdRBy8.png
    Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
  • lilsteffielilsteffie Posts: 598 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    kemmicals wrote: »
    How the **** did this go from a complaint about a toon getting generic'd to sexism and chivalry?

    Can we please leave the social justice bull on Tumblr?

    Some people just LOVE to derail things....

    Anyway back on topic, I didn't bother to really read the 2nd and so on pages of this thread for obvious reasons. For help on the issue that was originally at hand, all I can say it someone may have reported you for the name and have taken it the wrong way. Again.. considering the fact you didn't even get to talk to staff about this before you had the compulsory name change is a bit unfair. They need to have a secondary opinion for something like this, assuming only 1 person had to look at the report before the decision was made.

    Try contacting support to get their opinion on the 'TOS violation'. Other than that there's nothing much we forumites can do.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Handle:@XG3NX

    Champions Online.. where we sell lockboxes by the dozen.
  • skcarkskcark Posts: 715 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    They probably should, especially considering that the earlier part of your statement is a lie. A woman can't spontaneously make a child by herself. A man has some part in that too, you know.

    THANK YOU.

    Why do a lot of people speak so one sided like that...
  • biffsmackwellbiffsmackwell Posts: 4,739 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Off_the_Rails_(1).jpg

    Mmmmyep.

    asdfghjkl
    biffsig.jpg
This discussion has been closed.