Gwyndolin-chan

I want my bunny ears and egg ephemera permanently ;w;

I am absolutely loving these operator fashions!! So much creativity. Really liking the minimalist silhouettes. Lots of different themes going on! The scientist operator looked great @MrThanksalot @Airwolfen Love that set! Looks like an astronaut to me 😄 Absolutely loving that aesthetic and those pictures, @Ray_chick I love all of these aesthetics demonstrated in this thread. So diverse! I had lots of fun seeing all of your works. So many of them are such colourful sets that they bring the operator alive as a character! I'm definitely getting an itch to write from this. Very inspiring!! --- I'm super proud of my own operator's fashion! Took me a long while to arrive at this. Here I am going for a more brutal silhouette that speaks "brusque," with a very familiar black and red palette with silver metal highlights. I fell in love with the Pobbers greaves the moment I laid eyes on them. Combined with the hairstyle, I hope to communicate "punk" and a youthful sort of rebellion. I really like the eye patch and mask since I feel like they give off a sort of alienating or isolating and impassive vibe. Combined with the palette, it almost feels hostile! --- "I'll abide only for now." "Well? What is it?"

you'll never take me alive well i explained the present circumstances and why it's clear that for the present, the statement is still true, even if conditions are getting better. i feel like the idea that "when you're in a position of elevated privilege compared to others, seeing others receive privileges that bring their statuses up to your can feel like a threat" applies here because i can't otherwise explain to myself how you come to this conclusion. well guess what? process of elimination and principle of charity applied leads "okay, it's consistent in editing and the initial assumption remains in place" okay so then just ask her instead of assuming the worst ok so i made an oopsie woopsie. 29 deaths in 2017. there we go. how about this: you disprove that trans people experience a proportionate amount of violence. I'm pretty tired of doing all this one-sided research to present a conclusion that's been verified in survey after survey and that the WHO itself is convinced of and that is an accepted reality for a lot trans people, especially trans women of colour. Gods no.... Why are you so uncourteous? -- I used as much sensitivity to intersectionality I could muster at the time from the data i used. the USTS goes as far as to demonstrate that trans women of colour experience violence at a disproportionate rate compared to the rest of trans people. if all you have to say is "not enough data" then there's really no point to continue this subject. i'm not going to play your game of split the hair. if you're not convinced that trans people experience disproportionate evidence, and you're not going to have enough interpersonal faith to believe me, so we're both wasting time. i'm not going to argue any of this anymore. this is too painful. you have no experience, no faith, and i'm not the right person to teach it. wow. seriously? I didn't it say it didn't require these. I said it doesn't require as much a dissertation or a mathematical conjecture being tested. I feel like you're twisting my words at every chance you get into the worst possible meanings to put me into the worst possible positions of debate. I don't think you're interested in any of these ideas of rigour, accuracy, or precision if you fail to even recognize the difference between a forum thread and a criminal court. if you think people who want to use the term are food-starved, then what do you think of the trans people who don't? do you think they are not food-starved? that they must be engorged? #*!% this. i can't believe you. you are just so awful. how can you even ask this after all that demanding of proof? of not just any proof, but concrete proof, when even WHO recognizes there isn't a shortage of studies? (gee I wonder why, it must not be because the population at risk has for the longest time been invisible /s) I'm interested in seeing Warframe being successful and able to cater to a lot of people. One of the things that makes that possible is enculturing limits. no, running afoul of provincial law would require a much higher degree of proof than that needed for outrage........ since we're dealing with law, and not internet video game forums. it doesn't seem like you're able to recognize the difference in social contexts. okay, but consider this: because it flowed freely, all the people who are more inclined to just deal with it have already gone and disabled chat/muted everyone who does that -- since that's so often the case of internet sub-cultures. you're right, it wouldn't be a disaster. it would be just another article, just another piece of evidence to demonstrate the general horrible toxicity of so many gaming communities that plenty of people dislike and have formed groups specifically dedicated to not being a horrible cesspool. i don't want Region chat to be a cesspool. the current state of affairs is that "nezha is a [meme]" is banned. why should it be unbanned? the burden to demonstrate that does not lie on DE. i'm not valuing my group identities over my individual ones, nor are they separable for most people. i'm actually just sad at this point. you say you're trying to operate by anthropic principles but so much of what you say is just demanding 100% clairvoyance and information. You won't get that out of me. I'm just human.

...wat "troll" isn't a buzzword in the slightest. I don't know how you get this idea. It's been around since the start of internet forums. Nor is "bigot" a buzzword, despite its popularity. It has a specific meaning and sadly, some people who have posted on this subject have demonstrated in no uncertain terms that, yes, they indeed are obstinately intolerant of specific groups of people -- and then promptly have had their posts deleted by mods because their posts fit the definition to a T. oh, am I a "progressive" type? thank you. i'm pretty proud of the effort i've put into researching common biases and prejudices. I actually had to look up what you were talking about with BF5's sales and "get woke go...". The complete phrase quoted here is written as "get woke go broke." I had never heard of it before your post. Sure, BF5's poor sales could be explained by "'progressive' types'" influence. Or... it's just a bad game competing poorly in a timeframe it was never meant to compete in. I think you're just cherry picking; Overwatch and Apex Legends are both incredibly successful games that are ostensibly very influenced by progressive types (the devs of each game themselves state as much). But maybe... they're just good games? Warframe itself I think falls under the category of being influenced by progressive types. As far as I can see, that hasn't made it any less successful. I don't get the impression that this whole chat moderation issue has really affected many people at all. I think Warframe is a really good game and that that's going to be the deciding factor of whether or not it's going to be successful -- not whether or not you can say "nezha is a [meme]" in Region chat. Social interaction doesn't have clear rules or clear definitions. No amount of rules or clear definitions is going to affect how a person feels about being called this or that word or slur. And since it has proven to be a thing that risks negatively affecting people, much like any other slur with other meanings, it's reasonable to put in a filter to be on the safe side. If you feel that I've tread upon your rights, well then I'm terribly sorry but it has to be said. Some people, reasonable or not, legitimately feel uncomfortable when they have do deal with certain articles of language. I just find it annoying -- others find it worse. That's just how it is. It's just as fair to have a filter in Region chat as it would be to tell those people to turn off Region chat.

WARNING: i tripped halfway through the writing and revision of this post so the grammar and stuff will be spotty --- ...wut. This turnaround is (1) exceptionally recent and (2) the result of significant concentrated activism and reporting. This turnaround largely takes the form of anti-discrimination laws and policies. I don't think successfully making the case for not being discriminated against in housing, work, and law is a particularly high bar for "influence." Other forms of influence include leadership positions economic (ex. CEO), scientific, and political (ex. mayor -- direct representation) stations. These stations are largely not possessed by trans people in general, including trans women. Also, why are you putting "trans women" in quotation marks? Major global corporations and governments aren't exclusively listening to trans women on these matters. Other trans people and cis people also support these efforts for non-discrimination. Do you think asking governments and global corporations to fairly treat people counts as influence? When compared to "influence" including aspects like being in positions of leadership not involved specifically in anti-discrimination, as point of reference? Yes, if you look specifically at ant-discrimination policy and law, trans women have some degree of influence. If you include positions of leadership and authority, then no, the answer is easily that mostly cis people occupy such positions (which is fine except when there is very sparse record of trans people in general in positions of leadership and authority). In short, no. Trans women do have little influence in society (more than 10 years ago, and virtually none at all 30+ yrs ago (not counting historical societies)). She doesn't make that assumption. 03:20 -- "the word trap refers to either a male crossdresser or a trans woman, especially in the context of [anime]" 07:08 -- "trans women, in my country almost entirely trans women of colour, are murdered at a disgracefully high rate, reaching a record of 29 deaths in 2017." Contra's Youtube channel lists her location as "United States." So she names her country. Why do you keep putting "trans women" in quotation marks? Contra doesn't make any other claim than "disgracefully high rate." She makes no mention of "wildly disproportionate rate of violence." In other words, there is no statistics being used whatsoever. here you go: 16.9 assaults per 1000 (~1.69% of the US's general population) in 2017 https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv17.pdf 13% of trans people (respondents) have experienced physical assault in 2017 https://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS Full Report - FINAL 1.6.17.pdf 33% of those trans people are trans women. So ~4.29% of trans women have experienced physical assault assuming consistent proportionality between violence experienced by trans people and trans women specifically. ~0.6% of US's population is transgender. So from the proportion of US's population being transgender and the rate of assault for the population of US in general, we'd expect that ~0.6% of cases of assault to involve trans people. Except, when we look consider the napkin math we just did, we can see that ~13% of trans people have experienced physical violence and that ~4.29% of trans women have experienced physical assault. The numbers 13% and 4.29% are higher than 0.6% of cases of assault and can be explained in part by the USTS's nature as a volunteer survey vs. the NCVS which is randomized. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) quite plainly recognizes that transgender people (and gender and sexual minorities in general) experience violence at a higher rate than the general population and across the material they look at, they find a range between 11% and 69% having experienced violence at some point in their lifetime, making the yearly numbers of 13% and 4.29% look fairly tame. That said, it's an incredibly unsurprising conclusion to draw (that trans people and trans women especially) experience violence at an increased rate and isn't really a wild leap of any sort. If no amount of murder acceptable, then why even bring up "using statistics more responsibly?" If no amount of murder is acceptable, then what sets the standard for doing the topic "justice" as you say? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Trans_panic&redirect=no There you go. Pretty simple. 10 seconds googling for "trans panic defense". Further reading: https://lgbtbar.org/programs/advocacy/gay-trans-panic-defense/ The reason why she brings this up is to help illustrate why a trans woman might be upset by being called a trap and how the word "trap" might be perceived by someone who doesn't live off of anime memes and how that perception is the same sort of perception that is sometimes used in trials. "doesn't set it up or follow it through properly"? What do you call 07:25 up to 08:15? She literally did anonymize it as much as possible and show it to us! why is it a big deal for it to be a purely emotional appeal when the whole idea of whether you should or should not be allowed to use certain words and language is based ENTIRELY off of emotional appeal? If someone asked you not to swear in front of their children then you should respect that. Unless you don't believe in doing that I guess. I don't know what's left to be said or argued after that. Contra is attempting, in good faith, to explain something complex and personal in an entertaining way. I need you to timestamp your claim. 10:40? Is it when it goes into a black and white filter? That scene was sarcasm. I believe it's meant to communicate that being called a "trap" feels like being given an insulting compliment like "WOW, you're really this for a [your type of person] huh??" There's a term for that but I can't remember. As for the North Carolina bathroom law: whoah... no. That bill was transphobic and really bad. You've completely ignored all of what I said immediately following the quotation you took out of context. Important bit: REGION CHAT. Neither of your points are true. Here's why: (1) it is 100% true that one is ALWAYS allowed to use ANY language that they wish at ANY time at ANY place. (2) It is NOT 100% true that one is ALWAYS allowed to use ANY language that they wish at ANY time at ANY place without repercussion. (3) Neither of the above two points are contradictory. (4) None of the above three points necessarily factor into the decision-making regarding what language is considered a part of acceptable discourse and what language is not. (5) The only thing that factors into the decision-making regarding what language is allowed and what isn't in a single instance of discourse is mutual agreement between parties on what is agreeable and what is not. (6) The mutual agreement that all Warframe players who post on the Warframe forums adhere to is the terms of service and code of conduct as written and interpreted by DE. (7) DE is under no obligation to even consider any of our inputs regarding the mutual agreement. (8) In drafting and implementing such an agreement or policy, the only thing that matters is how each contributor feels about each atomic element of language (each word, in this case). (9) Each social circle and universe of discourse agrees on policy based purely on utterly arbitrary rules and feelings. (10) The trappings of "logical reasoning" and "freedom of speech" and "decency" or "to prevent bigotry" are similarly utterly arbitrary appeals to emotional response (perhaps this is unintuitive to understand -- that is understandable). (11) Hence why no amount of superficially "logical" reasoning can conclude whether this or that element of language is acceptable. (12) Hence why no amount of populist support for this or that filter to be removed or employed is in itself reason for DE to do anything. (13) (Because DE can decide to do anything they want as they are the sole contributor and enforcer of any code of conduct and the sole party holding any final influence whatsoever) (14) So when I say that "You are of course allowed to use whatever language you want in a different social setting and you are perfectly correct in that different places have different sentiments about the same words. None of this logically leads to the conclusion that DE should or shouldn't permit certain language in Region chat" in response to "It will vary one what area on the internet you are looking at as there will be those that "echo" the same sentiment, there are also those where the reverse is true", what I am saying is that what is acceptable and unacceptable in any corner of the internet other than this corner of the Internet called the Warframe official forums has nothing to do with whether or not any one particular word or phrase should be acceptable or unacceptable right here in this corner of the Internet called the Warframe official forums. (15) In other words, "it will vary depending on what area of the internet you are in" as an argument amounts to using "well they can do [xyz] so why can't we do [xyz]?" as an argument. (16) In other words, if DE internally decides that "No, we ARE (NOT) going to allow [word]," no amount of protest is going to change that unless their reason for allowing or forbidding any one word or phrase actually takes into account populist opinion (17) i.e. I'm pretty confident that the most effective way to get DE to allow or block a word or phrase with a filter is simply to show that most players want to use that word or phrase in DE's channels of discourse except that a lot of the demand for "trap" being totally removed from the filter boils down to "you're not letting me and muh politics" and personally, that's not a reason I would accept and all the other publicised cases of "moderation overreach" has in the large majority of cases been literally just "why can't I bash DE" and/or "why can't I use this one specific meme to bash trans people". (18) I don't care about the word "trap" for the most part except that when it comes specifically to Region chat because it's pretty obvious that the intent is not a cursory and harmless "I wanna meme" or "I wanna discuss androgynous bodies with penises in a light-hearted manner" and instead mostly just a lot of trolls crowding around responding to each others' "dogwhistling"/"virtue signalling" (these two words/phrases mean the same thing -- the vernacular you choose to use largely depends on if your beliefs are more consistent with one group's than another's). -- Aside Look. I've read through a lot of these sorts of threads ("but muh filter, modz r bad, DE evil") here on this forum and on Reddit. The number of outright, blatantly obvious transphobic posts is pretty big and it's even more disheartening to see that a lot of those extremely disparaging and hateful (either overtly or subtly) posts get a lot of upvotes. The mods have done a lot of work removing a lot of the worst offenders. I literally saw one of these such posts get removed from this very thread yesterday. And for me, that's what it comes down to: a LOT of people railing about "filter this" and "filter that" have ulterior motives. The fact that so few of you arguing against the filter recognize this prevalence of transphobia and/or actively dismiss it is telling to me then that a lot of people are going to abuse it (specifically "abuse," and not just "legitimately innocently meme") the moment DE decides to stop filtering it. In other words: I'm not buying it cuz I ain't stupid and I hope that DE doesn't buy it either OR that they have enough perspective to see that my perception is in error and that it's fine to go through with it. There are good reasons for why certain filters and practices should stop being exmployed. I just think there is a better reason not to. And for the record: I am glad DE hasn't already gone through with stopping their automodding. That said, I'd be very happy to satisfy my curiosity as to what sort of stuff is getting modded and their contexts, since I think that would be very revealing and I'm happy with transparency and data collection. --- I've addressed this. I do believe there are people who aren't going to be jerks about it. But there are definitely jerks who would be and are barely held in check anyway (see OP). *facepalm* The fact that cisgender heterosexual people constitute the majority does not alone make such a term as "trap" a result of coincidence. (Although I understand why in our world that would be a common belief.) That fact also requires a cultural myth that all the people one would come across are going to also be cisgender heterosexual people and that it's always going to be obvious. In our instance of possible universes, this cultural myth is called "cisgender heterosexual normativity." The simple counterproof is that if every single person in the world knew that any person they meet may not be cisgender and heterosexual, then it would never be a "safe" bet to assume as much and it would always be wise to be forward, honest, and direct by just asking. As a result, people who are androgynous and without any obvious performances of sexuality would more than likely go under a different term with different connotations other than "trap." uhhhh no. You misunderstand me or I'm not explaining myself correctly. People have a phobia about calling things x-phobic and being called x-phobic because most people perceive "x-phobic" as to mean THE WORST THING IN THE WORLD OMG IM GONNA GO TO HELL. Calling something x-phobic can have a range of severity. From not at all x-phobic, to "wow what in the world is wrong with you" and then you get ostracised x-phobic, to what I call "background radiation x-phobic" that is an unfortunate consequence but our world's history but nothing to lose sleep over. In this case, I mean to say that society today is mostly "background radiation x-phobic" that is an unfortunate consequence of our world's history and nothing really to lose sleep over (unless you're the one affected, in which case, that's understandable) except with plenty of pockets of atrocious examples of x-phobia. North Carolina's bathroom bill and the moral panic that has seized the USA regarding trans people land at the "pretty bad" transphobia level. Most of us in Canada don't give a Kubrow's poop about it, so what results is mostly "background radiation, unfortunate consequence" transphobia. tl;dr people have fears. You don't need to assume anything about me. Okay but this isn't mathematics. This is thread in a forum for a video game about a chat channel in that video game. It doesn't require anywhere near the same amount of rigour, accuracy, or precision. I'm sad I even have to go to this whole extent, though I have no one but me to blame for wasting my own time. 3d chess. i have a vocabulary and im gonna use it to maximum effect. tl;dr google "define symptomatic". It has more than one meaning than as it applies to medicine. Except that that's pointless: would you have been happier if I had chosen "indicative"? Is that less "metaphorical?" Or does that not simply apply a facade of logic and rationality? ^ because this right here? This idea of lingual choice and use of metaphor to create misleading or deceptive language? is exactly the same "manipulation" as you call it, that's going on with the word "trap" and why... y'know...... generally/usually it's polite not to call trans women that. And I wouldn't want people who don't know better to associate "trap" with trans women. And I think it's pretty fair to say that that possibility to associate traps with trans women to be fairly realistic. It's happening -- otherwise, why are we even discussing this? No, he's kind of an ass and completely missed the point. "I don't wanna be that guy" -> *proceeds to trainwreck* He gets very narrowly focused very quickly because there's only two possible groups to name. A human need that I could fulfill is to play Warframe instead of spending my time here but instead, here i am! Also: we are in conflict, you and I. I very much dislike having to demonstrate why something can have different meanings but still also exist simultaneously as a slur, much less contest my right to use a bathroom or whether benefiting from basic rights is a good and reasonable example of having influence in a society. I did. Here it is again: and Oh, to add to the above: part of the reason why lots of trans people identify with supposedly trap characters is because they often are the closest characters to a relatively positively presented and written character who is in some way shape or form gender nonconforming. Right? So it's largely an argument between lots of youth and young adult weebs. Like, I don't think anyone over the age of like... 30-35 even knows what a trap is or how it's contextualized by frickin ANIME. As far as I'm concerned, to start with, anyone who knows this much about traps as a concept basically doesn't t have a say in whether trap is a slur or not to the eyes of the general public because there's no way to know for sure how the general public will react and interpret some new (irrelevant) piece of vernacular. --- hot damn this stuff's makin me thirsty this sure is hard work, posting high so maybe i might stop early. --- and so basically, to start with, this is a stupid conversation no one cares about. talk about it with your weeb friends in your d1sc0rd servers, n00b. i don't know what you're talking about relevance actually i think i might have to stop lul hooooo boy it kickin in like what i am saying is: (1) just because other people say that in other circles doesn't mean we also have to say that in our circle (2) ok now im really OTHER thirsty (3) and basically like. so that's not a good reason for why we should or shouldn't say trap in our warframe circle they're just cuties... leave them alone well i don't want to come across as being governed by a different rule set. that said, i probably am because my context of learned ideas, social interactions, and overall human experience informs my ideas so like... of course I'm going to have an idea of what sort of ruleset i and others follow, if we follow the same ruleset at all, or if my ruleset only comes across as being different cuz my ruleset features others' i disagreee with rulesets as subsets of a flowchart of my ruleset like being a fascist or communist or anarchist or democrat or monarchist, like, the belief of how power should flow is the domain of each of these rulesets and belief systems. So, if my ruleset happened to contain as a subset someone else's ruleset, then I'm sure that would certainly make it seem like I operate under a completely different ruleset. --what i am saying is please explain what you mean by "governing myself vs other people" with different rulesets cuz i think like, if someone believes in a terrible awful ruleset and part of my experience is that that ruleset is awful (like if you think we live in a geocentric orbital system, and i think we live in a heliocentric orbital system, then we clearly interpreted data differently.) asdfasdf LIKE dude.l,,,,,,,,,, no...... i can't do this.... i believe that people's feelings inform all of their reality, purer than mathematical logic right? so what it comes down to is....... if a lot of people would feel bad, hurt, upset, angered, saddened, or other negative emotion if people actually casually used "trap" (or any other word) as part of the common Region chat vernacular, then we should ban the use of that word (and like, a chat ban for only that is too much but also that doesn't happen, probably deleting and adding a warning point is sufficient to curb behaviour) and I think there are a lot of people in Region chat who would be hurt because not all the people there will be familiar with anime trap subculture and that word's exact origins and I think this is the crux of the problem: (1) people who don't know the slur's exact origin and context wouldn't understand that it might not be meant as a slur so they only can infer its meaning through context and lingual metaphors (2) the word "trap" does invoke deception (3) so people who don't already know the slur's exact origin and context would interpret the metaphorical element and connotation of "trap", which is deception per (2). (4) and since people who aren't in the know are going to inevitably interact with people who are in the know and use that "in the know" language, (5) that's rather inevitably going to involve into a situation where there are multiple meanings for that word practised by different people (6) and due to the nature of the different meanings... they cause friction We're already at the friction step!!! The two worlds have collided! (7) and either all people gotta be in the know or not all people gotta be in the know, and it's a race to see which group consumes 100% of the Region chat population that means we gotta COMPETE!!! grrrrrrrrRRRRRRAAAAAAA (8) meanwhile, DE watches us fight and die like animals over our idols cackling as their capitalist death machines murder swathes of corpus and grineer alike (9) it doesn't matter to them, our wallets are all gonna die so that's it then. You and I must duel to the death, unless in the midst of tragic violence we brush up sensually against each other, cupids trading arrows, it's 20 years later "hi honey" IS THIS MANIPULATION? IS THIS QWHAT YOU WANAAANNTTTTTTTT BABBYYYYYYYYYYYYY O MOMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA OOOOOOOoooooooouuuwuUUUUUUOOOOOOO .... dude, no Canadian and American corporate culture really does not allow use of the N word. DE's a Canadian company and there are a lot of US and Canadian customers/players. "sanitzed and controlled spaces" -> yes, dude, that's exactly the point. Region chat is that sanitized and controlled space to DE. That's exactly why DE does this! Region chat is one of the first player-to-player interactions in Warframe, a game that will be rife with player interaction. Of course they want it to be sanitized and controlled! The forums are too! (even stricter, I might add)! Letting players say the N word would be a DISASTER for DE!! Likewise for "trap" specifically because of the in-know-out-know group dynamic!! like, people still get shot over the N word, it's seriously not safe to just blurt out the N word depending on where you are. people carry their grudges and prejudices into cyberspace and it feels as though you interpret this in a vacuum. it's not safe anyway I see this as a case of harm reduction being the method. okay well what are our initial places of agreement? and like, in the process of moving beyond the initial places of agreement, you just get looped back into tribalism. it just happens, like a helix. drill. People are in a constant loop of shared agreement achieved, people begin to stray because of natural mutations and natural selection of ideas, people stray too far and start disagreeing, then you do have to just bring it back but you can't ever stop it. You need to just flow and march onwards. time can't be reverrsed.... probably. Like, we already are tribal. we're right now CALCULATING the shared agreement by posting back and forth together! wow, isnt that fun? seems fun to me. aahhhhhhhh yes... i am... very nefarious......... muhahahahahaha UHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OOHOHOHOHOOO OOOOWWOWOWOOOOWOOOOO "That's surely not the case here" SUUUUURE. /s why even ask this if you're so sure? If you honestly think I am being nefarious or destructive, just so say. You sound coy to me

That's fair. A warning at first offense is fair. In case this is directed to me: I'm not denying anyone anything. Likewise, I understand and appreciate these differences. Actually, I don't really care much at all about how the bot works. It won't change the fact that Nezha is beautiful and adorable and that some people are rude as hell. It's just funny to see some very specific people claim they have an "argument" against trans people. (Do they have one against Canadians too?) wew

Porn is a poor educator for respectable language. Porn often uses language to specifically depersonalize its actors to help viewers self-insert for a quick sexual fantasy. Porn terms, as such, should not be applied to people in interpersonal interactions because productive interpersonal interactions rely on... well. Balanced personal investment. The "positive" aspect of "trap" is that it can, in the right crowds, grab positive attention which is important because usually people who call themselves "trap" and who permit others to call them as such are often taught that their bodies, presentation, or behaviour is unwanted by cishet normative society. This doesn't make it okay to use the word in all contexts and it is a safe bet to not use it to describe someone unless they make it specifically clear that it's okay with them. >>That's why claims that using that word to describe an object (not against a person) seem baseless I don't think anyone has a problem with "a device or enclosure designed to catch and retain animals, typically by allowing entry but not exit or by catching hold of a part of the body". It's not the meaning that is considered a slur. >>If it's made illegal in a country, if there's study made on that, or even there was a dictionary entry saying it's a slur, it would be easier to take those claims seriously. You'll either have to take my word for it or look it up why or how "trap" can be a slur. Many slurs at the most prominent time of their use as a slur did not have a derogatory dictionary definition and I don't think any country has ever outright made slurs illegal. When it is used as a slur, it is used towards people who don't conform to cisgender heterosexual normative social standards. >>Also, by instantly, demonizing anyone who disagrees (and you seem to do that with every message), you're making them less likely to agree with you and further down the line with the points you are trying to make, even if at some point you back them up with data. Short version: Meh, not my problem. Long version: Meh, I'm only human. A moderator already removed my worst post(s?). But frankly? Bigots don't live thinking they are bigoted and bigots rarely consider if something they've said or done is actually bigoted. Data doesn't convince bigots because by definition, many of examples of bigotry (sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc.) are the result of irrationality. So for the most part, I've given up on accruing and sharing data. The most moving arguments in the end are not data-filled arguments but human stories, emotions, and sharing of personal experiences.

The risk of harm presented by a word and its usage as a slur is weighed against the probability of its usage being that of a slur. The context of discourse is Region chat. In Region chat, most players that use the word use it in the "it's a trap" format or "Nezha is a trap" and that is pointedly a statement that is a product of background radiation transphobia and gender role enforcement in society and reflects its more malicious use as a slur. Yes, people do use it for non-malicious reasons and discussion. I'm not denying that at all. What I am saying is that the word as used in Region chat is very often used in a transphobic fashion and so there is reason to automate moderation of its usage in Region chat. Region chat in general is a toxic wasteland and I turned it off and I am happy that DE's moderation is addressing one part of this. There are other allowable words that are slurs and I'm sure they're either an oversight or people don't think to use them in the sense of a slur as often in Region chat. You are of course allowed to use whatever language you want in a different social setting and you are perfectly correct in that different places have different sentiments about the same words. None of this logically leads to the conclusion that DE should or shouldn't permit certain language in Region chat. The same could be said about a lot of other words blocked by the filter. DE made their choice and they're playing it safe. That's fair. And no, "overreach" is not at all the cause for the creation of the "nezha is a trap" meme. The cause of the meme is a transphobic society's members interpreting Nezha's character design and it's not at all a surprise that the "it's a trap" meme is applied to Nezha. The "nezha is a trap" meme is just an extension of "[x character] is a trap" meme. "Context" means "the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed". In most cases for Region chat, the place where the automod takes place, "trap" is being used as a way to bait people into getting kicked or as troll bait. (Besides that, the bot doesn't blanket ban the word "trap".) It's not about winning an argument. If winning the argument is what you are concerned about, then I don't think you have any personal investment in the topic at hand. That said, if it is, then I am automatically winning for every moment DE refuses to budge specifically because I don't want to see a particularly bad meme that spawned as a result of cisgender heterosexual normativity in Region chat. ... wow. SMunroe's video was a trainwreck. Especially when he got to discussing the panic defense. The "trap" character research was fine but also irrelevant. But first, the inline videos that are being referred to: "Are Traps Gay" By Contrapoints "Traps" Don't Exist and Here's Why By Pedantic Romantic All meanings of the word "trap" relevant to this discussion stem from contradictions introduced by cishet normativity. Contra points this out clearly. SMonroe superbly fails to see the larger picture in that the word "trap" and its usage is symptomatic of cishet normativity conflicting with natural human sexuality and gender. He fails to recognize why trans people relate to often-called trap characters, why the term was "co-opted" by trans people, and why some trans people "grow out of it." Please point to some examples of these fallacies as they apply to Contra's video. As far as I can tell, she's addressed all the relevant points. The larger picture is that advocating for permitting the use of words that are often used as slurs is less and less helpful and more and more risky when the setting of discourse becomes larger and larger. Ex. some people use morphed forms of a racial slur for Black people as a term of endearment but the scope of its use is amongst members who mutually understand and respect each other's experiences. Advocating for that particular slur's return to broad usage is akin to advocating for the material conditions that slur is associated with, i.e. slavery. If I have to explain why slavery or transphobia is bad (or if I have to explain why racism or sexism, etc. is bad), then I'm probably done with this conversation. It specifically must be tribally interpreted and polarized in order to make sense of why and how the use of slurs is rendered acceptable or unacceptable between conversant partners. When the tribal configuration forms, it's possible to observe on what axes people disagree on.

i applaud you for your continued streak in ignoring the key points of "it's being used as a slur" (and the implication that many people do use it as a slur) and "the overwhelming majority of the trans community experiences it as a slur." it's truly impressive It already has context: Region chat is where the bot functions and it also happens to be where the bot baiters and trolls are. Seems appropriate to me to automate taking out the trash where the trash resides.

i see you've successfully ignored the key contextual points of "it's being used as a slur" and "the overwhelming majority of the trans community experiences it as a slur." Both of which are true. Most people don't live on the Internet eating memes for sustenance. While useful, this isn't relevant to the way DE wants to moderate their chat spaces nor would providing better tools be mutually exclusive from also having global chat filters. Good thing video games don't depend on the success of trolls and bigots cheaply disguised as free speech absolutists so personally I'm actually not at all worried about that 🙂

Ammo Mutation mods (including Carrier's Ammo Case) are significantly weaker in the new melee system. Previously, putting Ammo Mutation mods in one's loadout resolves just about any ammo economy issue. In the worst case scenario of completely running out of ammo, one could resort to using quick melee while continuing to pick up ammo with Ammo Mutation. Now, because of the new system, quick melee is not an option to substitute one's combat ability while Ammo Mutation does its magic. The moment one melees, the player now has their melee weapon equipped and Ammo Mutation mods stop working because the currently equipped item does not use ammo. Suggestion: allow Ammo Mutation mods to pick up and mutate ammo into the correct ammo for whichever weapon has the least ammo (current ammo to ammo maximum ratio). This would help alleviate the indirect nerf the new system results in.

Framerate has felt a lot more consistent already, thank you so much for your work!

Both your cuts look great, although I'm partial to the second photo since you show your face xD 👍

That's a really good idea! I don't know why I keep forgetting about it. I could even make it funky colours I guess!

i hope so! But also, I've grown fond of shorter cuts that are styled reminiscent greaser subculture stuff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greaser_(subculture) slicked back hair and stuff :3 it's cool~ and at the length I'm thinking of, I could go back to bangs too. I dunno though. I really love my long hair. Makes me feel cute uwu