orioler25

This is why graduate student and teaching assistant unions exist. I'd dare this student to contest a zero on a paper that is flatout plagiarism.

Thats what I'm thinking. Other platforms got unusable.

Nice, ableism too, hitting all the bases. Of course you're not a bigot lmao.

Fetishization is a reassertion of power under settler-colonialism.

Incredible display. Check out Jasbir Puar and come back here if you ever get tired of being a pompous traitor.

Brother, there is no faster way to sound like some hetero normie than to call it the "lgbtq+ community" off stage. You are a bigot when you say that disagreeing with a queer liberal is ironic or funny with the implication of course being that its hypocritical or counter-productive to be intellectually rigorous. Queerness is not a hive-mind, it is a descriptor of people with a myriad of intersecting sociopolitical interests. It is true that queer liberals subscribe to a system that ultimately seeks to eradicate queerness, yet they choose to do so anyway.

Shut up about shit you don't know about.

Edit: quickly reread the convo to ensure I wasn't being an asshole and realized that you don't know what liberalism even is and have decided to triple down rather than question if the words make sense. Wild.

Anyone who criticizes liberalism is toxic to a liberal.

Playing dumb doesn't project confidence like you think it does

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying suggest here as it kind of requires you to be a bigot to make sense. I've met very many queer liberals who endorse heteronormativity, knowingly or otherwise, as being queer doesn't imbue you with political literacy or class solidarity. Europeans live in the imperial metropole, and thus many queer Europeans benefit from imperialism and have a material incentive to support its existence politically.

Did you mean to suggest that queer people have no nuance in their existence?

Its because most "leftists" are white liberals who learned about socialist theory through YouTube or Twitter. Lemmy is a very liberal site, but because it's sitting next to social media platforms that literally suck up the ground water to promote fascism, liberals mistake it as something more. What socialists or anarchists there are on here also tend to be of the STEM variety that does not read theory and therefore is less equipped to deal with appropriated language.

I mean, I'll never give it a shot to play. It's too long, I have a job, and I have games I want to play more that will certainly be more enjoyable to me. I never played this game, as I said it's not even remotely my taste. That's also why I need to have someone explain what makes it supposedly good for what it is.

Most of these remarks are circular though, "it's good because it's good/I liked it." Which is fine, but doesn't really speak to the game. Gameplay seems to be where you're better at articulating what's actually good here. I don't know this genre, so it's exceptional that there is a combination of active and passive combat tied to the player's experience? This is something exclusive or executed in a notable way here, or it's just something that's been done before that you feel is elevated because you like the story production?

One nice thing about the current situation is we have a very effective and intuitive way to explain to gamers that capitalism is bad.