Sexist Game or Sandbox?

This sounds like a convenient excuse to ignore historical fact and engage in historical revisionism to suit your political views.

I strongly suspect that historical fact does not actually exist in the sense you mean. History is not a series of facts in chronological order.
 
This sounds like a convenient excuse to ignore historical fact and engage in historical revisionism to suit your political views.

And some people mistake a partial collection of facts for a whole reality, leading them to do the equivalent of putting Iguanodons thumb on its nose.

History has been accidentally and deliberately obscured from our sight.
 
@MaryKB I saw what you posted before you deleted it. "Practically" running things is not the same as being a de facto head of state, I'm sorry, but that doesn't wash with me. And as for "defending da boyz", I'm not defending anyone. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of toxic feminism and PC gone wild. Sorry, but I have no patience for either. Pardon me for being a moderate feminist. Unlike you I'm not out to castrate and emasculate every man I see. I actually see the good in some people. I don't expect you to understand that as your misandry is legendary at this point.
I didn't feel like arguing about it, but oh well. Fortunately your misogynistic opinions are completely worthless.

And you do constantly make thoughtless posts defending misogynistic positions, as if you're completely unaware of what you're talking about. You also seem to have absolutely no sense of empathy, and don't seem to be able to read people at all, either.

Your education on gender issues appears to be as non-existent as your understanding of history.

Whatever.
 
@MaryKB I saw what you posted before you deleted it.

The fact that she deleted it might suggest she at least somewhat regretted posting it and wanted to walk it back. Not that that means you shouldn't react if you saw it of course, but still.

Edit: Well I timed that badly it seems, but never mind.
 
Sorry Mary, but you don't understand me at all.

That being said, I will no longer be posting in this thread.
 
Sorry Mary, but you don't understand me at all.
I understand you quite well, as you interact on this forum.

You are completely wrong on pretty much all your opinions, but you act like you're some sort of supreme authority. You don't discuss, you lecture. And you routinely denegrate women.
 
I didn't get the point about Catherine either, she wasn't just practically running things, she was actual empress...

One could even say she was great.

The Medicci lady why not use Sforza she ruled her city in her own name.

I haven't played Civ V and VI.

Switched from Civ to Paradox games. I think I own 5 just never played it.
 
I didn't feel like arguing about it, but oh well. Fortunately your misogynistic opinions are completely worthless.

And you do constantly make thoughtless posts defending misogynistic positions, as if you're completely unaware of what you're talking about. You also seem to have absolutely no sense of empathy, and don't seem to be able to read people at all, either.

Your education on gender issues appears to be as non-existent as your understanding of history.

Whatever.

Empathy does not supersede reality in sane rationale. Rather, to ignore evidence/reality is to demonstrate a lack of empathy oneself. This is how one might get past the cognitive dissonance required to simultaneously claim others lack empathy while committing the ad hominem fallacy repeatedly.
 
Moderator Action: I heavily suggest that people calm down or this thread will be going on a break. It is perfectly possible to debate matters without getting down and wrestling in the metaphorical bear pit.
 
History was written by men it's in of the first things they drum into you at Uni. Who wrote it and why.

Still doesn't change you had no female Roman Emperors.

Getting a female Emperor through player agency is fine if you make a Roman game. Paradox made Imperium but I got bored fairly quickly with it.
 
Empathy does not supersede reality in sane rationale. Rather, to ignore evidence/reality is to demonstrate a lack of empathy oneself. This is how one might get past the cognitive dissonance required to simultaneously claim others lack empathy while committing the ad hominem fallacy repeatedly.
Garbage. Empathy is extremely important for being able to relate to other people. Remember, "logic is the beginning of wisdom and not the end." But calling your biased opinions "logic" doesn't make it so.
 
Hmm. Why would an entirely innocent post about not getting lemon in your eyes just go "missing" like that...
 
Garbage. Empathy is extremely important for being able to relate to other people. Remember, "logic is the beginning of wisdom and not the end." But calling your biased opinions "logic" doesn't make it so.

I think we just have different opinions on diversity.

To me it means you have a variety of things IRL and entertainment. That means things like Rome, Game of Thrones and Captain Marvel or The Joker.

You buy heavily into ideological purity over fun.

You can have both as well with female protagonists. Outlander and Wonder Women come to mind. WW is fantasy like all superhero movies.

Outlanders classic fish out of water story. Bad things happen to the protagonists because the timeframe it's set in is crappy by modern standards.
 
I love Outlander movie !
 
Still doesn't change you had no female Roman Emperors.
Not true, this is what male bias in history teaches you. There were at least a few women who ruled Rome, even if some were for brief periods (women rulers such as Fulvia even had their likenesses printed on coins) I know there were at least one or two emperors whose mothers ruled as regents when they were young, and other emperors' wives who ruled after their deaths.
 
Movie? I'm thinking of the TV show. Apparently it's viewership skews a bit more female. Same with Gilmore Girls.

I'm not in charge of the TV at my place, she is.
 
Great posts, @Lemon Merchant :goodjob:
I didn't get the point about Catherine either, she wasn't just practically running things, she was actual empress...
She was speaking about Catherine de Medicis, regent in France, not Catherine the Great, empress in Russia ^^
 
Last edited:
 
Back
Top Bottom