This is where you can remind us how much the software sucks and how dead the community is.


[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Email
Subject   (reply to 4010)
Message
BB Code
File
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: ASS, BMP, CSS, FLAC, GIF, JPEG, JPG, MP3, OGG, PDF, PNG, PSD, RAR, SWF, TORRENT, TXT, WEBM, ZIP
  • Maximum file size allowed is 10000 KB.
  • Images greater than 260x260 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 1614 unique user posts.
  • board catalog

File 137169481921.jpg - (90.51KB , 500x688 , e57cc09ea0b2f8efcc621046a7e36b26.jpg )
4010 No. 4010 [Edit]
Last time this idea was mentioned it developed into a huge insult-fest so I'd like to try again. Personally I believe fujoshi should be allowed on the site. They should be allowed to talk about their husbando, yaoi, other fujoshi interests etc, its just that they shouldnt draw attention to their gender or other parts of thei real life identity (same for male users of the site, actually). I don't see a reason why fellow abnormals and otaku shouldn't be here, as we're all in the same boat. Already there are a few girls lurking here and they are well behaved.

I do not think people get annoyed by seeing female oriented otaku stuff here per se, they are just afraid of the implications that having females has on the site. Having a female on the site doesn't automaically mean any of the rules are broken actually.

At any rate keep this discussion civil and stay on topic. Give your responses a sound logical basis. Don't insult others and don't link this to feminism or the actions of other females either, because that has nothing to do with this issue (fujoshi and normal females are as distinct as male otaku and normal males).
27 posts omitted. Last 50 shown. Expand all images
>> No. 4073 [Edit]
>>4072
true enough.
>> No. 4074 [Edit]
>>4071
>what about users who hate women because women are lying cheating manipulative self centered gold digging whores?
I don't think you're understanding women from their perspectives. I mean that if you think women are "lying cheating manipulative self centered gold digging whores," you should understand what's causing that perception. Of course it's your point of view (i.e. your experiences and your interpretations of them), but you should ask what is leading to your perception of women as such, socially speaking (both in your case and in the case of women generally).
>> No. 4078 [Edit]
>>4074
If I start with a nice meal from a five star restaurant, I couldn't care less if a long journey trough my gastrointestinal tract caused it to come out as shit. That shit is still shit and it doesn't matter how it became shit or what it was before it became shit.

If however you're trying to say my personal experiences along with everything else I've ever witnessed have clouded my judgement, than what exactly is a person supposed to make their judgment on? Should I just ignore the many horror stories I hear and see of men getting taken advantage of by toxic women?
>> No. 4080 [Edit]
>>4069
My bad, I misunderstood your core points- which I do agree with. Carry on.
>> No. 4082 [Edit]
>>4078
I was saying both. There are qualities you're labeling with "gold digging (etc.)" that are interpretations of what you've heard about women and what you've seen from women, but what you're usually reading are worst case scenarios that most people may experience perhaps once, perhaps never.

The problem is that, reading enough of them, you'll begin to find patterns in those stories (the traits you listed were interpretations and repetitions of qualities interpreted by the writers of those stories) and form generalizations based on those patterns. Because of that, your mind begins searching for these patterns you found whenever you see women anywhere, and, whether it's applicable or not, you start applying the generalizations formed earlier based on the horror stories to them because your experiences with women were probably negative to some degree starting out (or, possibly but less likely, neutral from inexperience) and the mental framework you created from the stories to understand women ends up exacerbating the overall negativity of those experiences and your current perception of women, trying to fit them into your generalizations (in other words, trying to find some way to dislike them), which in turn reinforces your framework of women being awful when you always find something, as the personalities of other people as we perceive them are reductive interpretations of actions (sometimes many actions, sometimes just one).

In order to attempt to find out whether your perceptions are relatively correct or skewed, you have to ask yourself, if your perceptions are skewed, what might have caused that and how can you realign them toward something more reflective of the world as it is (perhaps asking the question itself amounts to you being able to detach yourself enough to realign them). You shouldn't necessarily "ignore" the stories, but you should realize that the stories are just that: stories, experiences reinterpreted by writers into a coherent narrative. And not only are they just stories, but they're horror stories, the worst of the worst. They're designed to make the woman in the story into a monster, regardless of whether she truly was or wasn't one.
>> No. 4090 [Edit]
>>4082

I don't think /tc/ is the right place to talk about objective judgment of the beings we call humans. If you're a bitter, jaded misanthrope you'll feel right at home, if not you might... No, you will have trouble relating to stories of other people.
On /tc/ trying to fix somebody's warped worldview is not only meaningless, it's also a fool's errand. Even if the person in question believes every single woman out there is a gold digging whore whose sole purpose in life is making his life miserable.
>> No. 4091 [Edit]
>>4090
I hate to rain on your parade, but virtually NOBODY is willing to change their worldview for a stranger, be it a "bitter, jaded" TC user or any random stereotypical Ford Driver pulled off the street. This includes the people that like to act like the 'enlightened elite' and criticize people for being close minded (no, I'm not necessarily accusing you or the poster above you of doing that).

You act as though this is something characteristic of NEETs or TC, when really it's something characteristic of human beings as a whole. Many TC users have had their fair share of bad experiences with people, yes, but I would argue that the average person's worldview is skewed just as much, albeit probably in a different direction (prime example: feminists).
>> No. 4092 [Edit]
>>4091

>You act as though this is something characteristic of NEETs or TC

I'm not, I'm well aware that it's 'normal' to do so, I just said I don't think this is the best place to try to pull it off.

>average person's worldview is skewed just as much, albeit probably in a different direction (prime example: feminists)

That's anything but average, it's just the opposite spectrum of extremism.
>> No. 4094 [Edit]
>>4092
It's average in the sense that it's a common/widespread mentality (as well as socially acceptable), even if it's rather extreme on the scale.

Post edited on 26th Jun 2013, 7:54pm
>> No. 4099 [Edit]
File 137259140472.gif - (2.91MB , 360x360 , 1368779248090.gif )
4099
>>4012
This guy makes sense.
Everyone on /so/ writes and acts like a woman all the time, even if you had big welcome signs and advertised, it would only get slightly more cringeworthy than it is now.

http://uboachan.net/
Pretty sure this site is majority girls.

I was under the impression that this site was actually becoming flooded with fujoshi given the current state of /so/, and all the animes like precure and some of those longeyelashespointychin romance female MC threads that were here a few months ago.

picture unrelated, but dont open it if you're scared of guro, REAL DRAWINGS HARMED IN THE MAKING!!1
>> No. 4101 [Edit]
>>4099
Oh, the guro argument guy again. Still frustrated over that?
>> No. 4102 [Edit]
>>4101

If it's one thing I've learned in my almost 3 years of being here, it's that there's some people who can never let something go. Expect to hear from mad guro guy for the next 5 years
>> No. 4103 [Edit]
>>4099
>>4012 is a fujoshi and WANTS more females on the site. The only thing they're agreeing with you on is that /so/ is shitty.

Though given the fact that you're randomly bringing up the guro shit again, I'm guessing you've only just recently taken up the "/so/ sucks" side of the argument as a result of your asspain in that thread a couple of weeks ago.
>> No. 4104 [Edit]
>>4103
I just read the locked thread on guro, a mod can check my IP and compare with that thread if they want.
I thought it was pretty funny, guess you guys didnt.

I still agree with the poster I first responded to in that /so/ is a whinefest. If you're worried about girls attentionwhoring, people already do it in /so/ by blogging about every little thing in their life.

The link I posted is from a board that actually has fujoshi, if you add shitty conventions (which I recall there being threads of already a year ago) and cosplay along with trannies and put them all in /so/, it wouldn't be much worse than it is already.

The anime thing is also true, there have been shitty fujoshit animes posted on /an/ lately.

I dont see why you ignored everything else on my post just because of the guro thing, I just wanted to make my post funny.
>> No. 4105 [Edit]
>>4104
The 'guro guy' has already changed his IP to ban evade multiple different times and posted in different threads besides that one. I'm not accusing you of lying here, but I'm sure you can see where the other poster and I would get the impression that you were him, given his tendency to keep coming back.

/so/ has plenty of attention-whoring posts, sure, but I still see decent threads pop up there now and then. As for your point regarding /an/, I completely agree. My main concern is that many of them can't post without dragging their gender into everything. I'm not worried about /so/ becoming shittier given the already rather bloglike nature of the place; I just don't want to see an influx of off-handed 'I'm a girl' references, cries of "persecution", and the inevitable gender war threads (ie: feminist shit, 'you guys are all misogynists', etc) that tend to follow them. I have no problems if they intend to stay anonymous and discuss otaku subjects with the rest of us, and I'm sure there are at least a few doing this right now. The longer this thread stays up, though, the more I think OP is advocating the more common attention-whore brand of fujoshi.
>> No. 4106 [Edit]
>>4104
The women of uboachan are not fujoshi, they are lesbian, cosplaying Ford Drivers.
>> No. 4107 [Edit]
File 137267482323.png - (63.97KB , 452x102 , tcban.png )
4107
>>4099

>like precure

... And what is that supposed to have to do with fujoshi?
No, wait, before that - what is it supposed to have with women period? Picture very fucking related.
Also, most fujoshi either dislike or have no interest in 'ongeyelashespointychin romance female MC' shows.

>shitty fujoshit animes posted on /an/ lately

Haven't really seen a single thread like that. Like, ever.
>> No. 4108 [Edit]
 
>>4107
> most fujoshi either dislike or have no interest in 'ongeyelashespointychin romance female MC' shows.

i like that kind of show
>> No. 4109 [Edit]
 
especially when some of the characters are part animal (but also not furries)
>> No. 4110 [Edit]
The only recent fujoshit anime I can think of was Uta no☆Prince-sama, and no one bothered to make a thread for that in spite of it being one of the best sellers in japan.
>> No. 4111 [Edit]
Do you guys even realize what fujoshi means?
>> No. 4112 [Edit]
>>4111
And here comes the obligatory tryhard to bitch about semantics. Let me guess, you're butthurt because everyone here is using the term fujoshi interchangably with 'female otaku' instead of 'yaoi loving girl' or its literal meaning 'rotten girl'?
>> No. 4114 [Edit]
>>4109
Yeah, I love Fruits Basket as much as I loathe blood and flesh women. If this is the kind of shows that's making all the fuzz, this discussion is ridiculous: they've always been part of /tc/. Go ahead and post, whatever you are.
>> No. 4115 [Edit]
>>4110

http://tohno-chan.com/an/res/11674.html
http://tohno-chan.com/an/res/11674.html
http://tohno-chan.com/an/res/13460.html
>> No. 4116 [Edit]
>>4112

>Let me guess, you're butthurt because everyone here is using the term fujoshi interchangably with 'female otaku' instead of 'yaoi loving girl' or its literal meaning 'rotten girl'?

Brilliant, let's juse use those two terms interchangeably. Who cares if fujoshi is a term that refers to a group with a specific, somewhat niche interests; as long as they're female it's okay to call them fujoshi.

Starting today I'll call all men fudanshi and all women rekijo, hope there won't be anyone among who who is enough of a tryhard to bitch about semantics.
>> No. 4117 [Edit]
>>4116
Your analogies are as poor as your attempts to sound educated by crying over this shit in the first place. The bottom line is that fujoshi is used as a term for female otaku in western otaku communities. If you don't like it, fuck off or head on over to 2ch or one its many variations.

Do you also get your ninja headband in a knot every time someone uses the term hentai to refer to anime pornography?
>> No. 4118 [Edit]
>>4117

Wonderful argument, if everybody is retarded and misusing a given term then it's perfectly fine, let's just change what the term stands for. Ah, such a brilliant solution, I wonder why I never considered that one before.
>> No. 4119 [Edit]
>>4118
You must be pretty unobservant, because this slang formation is something that happens frequently over language barriers. Even a child could see your laughable lack of logic here.
>> No. 4148 [Edit]
I think people shouldn't be surprised when the site is full of people who are hostile against 3D women, when even the site owner himself hates 3D women.
>> No. 4149 [Edit]
>>4148
So did he ever actually say "I hate women" or is that grossly exaggerated like the overwhelming majority of accusations of "misogyny"? Though I know simply not wanting to date 3D women is enough to be labeled a woman-hater nowadays.
>> No. 4150 [Edit]
I hate (real) women
>> No. 4151 [Edit]
>>4150
Well, that clears that up. Can't say I personally blame you. I just see a lot of males that don't hate or even dislike women branded as "misogynists" for so much as disagreeing with a female at any point in their lives.

Post edited on 11th Jul 2013, 12:29am
>> No. 4152 [Edit]
>>4151
you're right, and that's one of the reasons why I don't like (real) women.
>> No. 4153 [Edit]
>>4152
>>4150
We're all full of contradictions.
>> No. 4154 [Edit]
Just post and try not to have a victim complex when one or two people say something remotely bad about you.
>> No. 4155 [Edit]
>>4154

It's not a victim complex if you actually do get attacked.

That being said, should something like that happen just report it and move on.
>> No. 4156 [Edit]
>>4155
It is a victim complex if you assume you're being attacked for a reason that has nothing to do with the actual reason why you're being criticized. That one person said it perfectly earlier; they just automatically assume everyone is hating on them because of their gender instead of their behavior, even if they don't explicitly mention their gender. If that isn't a bona fide victim complex, I don't know what is.
>> No. 4157 [Edit]
>>4155
>>4156
Jesus Christ, once again, don't be surprised when people insult you when you come on a site with a relatively small userbase, full of people who love and obsess over 2D and hate 3D. Sure there are probably those few homodimensional fags out there who actually somehow like 3D (I personally think they should fuck off there are thousands of other sites that would better suit their tastes) and also the people that dislike 3DPDs romantically but don't mind them as people.

Regardless, there is still that what I believe to be a big portion of people that dislike and even despise 3D and 3DPDs. For example, If a hetero walked into a gay bar and got insulted for being into chics, he shouldn't be surprised, or if a black guy announces on some white pride website that he is black and gets insulted, while I hate racism, sorry it's his fault for stepping onto a site like that. Hopefully you get the picture by now. For some reason Ford Drivers, 3DPDs, and whatever kind of people the site obviously would have a problem with always feel the need to come here announce who they are and expect to be welcomed, they just keep pushing buttons, first they want that as long as they don't announce themselves they can post, then they want to be able to announce themselves, then they don't want to ever be insulted, it's horrible.
>> No. 4158 [Edit]
>>4157
Well said. They can already post here anonymously with everyone else and follow the same rules and regulations as everyone else. Asking for additional special treatment in a place like this is pretty ridiculous, and really makes you question how "anonymous" they intend to stay.
>> No. 4160 [Edit]
>>4159
What the fuck are you going on about.
>> No. 4161 [Edit]
>>4159
Do you honestly not see any hypocrisy at all in using greentext, reaction images, terms like "lawl", "fail", and "inb4"... and then telling someone else to go back to /b/?

Get off this site, sister. If I recall you were doing the same exact shit in /so/ a few weeks ago.
>> No. 4163 [Edit]
All 3d is untrustworthy. The Fashion thread that caused a freakout recently isn't even bad, no one is spreading 3d bullshit or acting like a normal and not fitting in. Definitely male here and I like looking at cute things. Does that make me a Fujoshi? As long as this isn't /soc/ (goes for any 3d people) and people aren't advertising themselves I don't give a fuck about who you are.
>> No. 4172 [Edit]
>>4171
>Sometimes you just wanna chill with a few chicks,
So go somewhere else.
>> No. 4173 [Edit]
Why is this a thread
>> No. 4174 [Edit]
File 137410358657.jpg - (46.78KB , 750x424 , 54924305201003211437124168505126622_002_640.jpg )
4174
>>4172
no u
>> No. 4175 [Edit]
>>4171
Probably responding to a troll here, but fujoshi are already allowed on TC. The only thing that isn't allowed is calling attention to your gender for no reason. How many times does this seriously need to be stated? Are OP and her ilk really incapable of seeing this? Or do they think it's not even worth posting unless they can broadcast their gender to everyone?

>>4173
I've been wondering this for a while now.
>> No. 4225 [Edit]
(I think you guys are forgetting women can't be NEETs, hikis or even virgins)
>> No. 4229 [Edit]
>>4225
They can, the last two are just astronomically rare compared to their male counterparts. I'd rather you didn't post shit like that though, as it feeds their persecution complex and also gives them a free ticket to be histrionic if they so choose.
>> No. 4239 [Edit]
>>4229
Sure they can. Usually when they're really ugly. But in that case you don't even think of them as being girls.
>> No. 4307 [Edit]
>>4239
I don't see why I wouldn't. I think the average "hot" girl looks fucking ugly as shit too.
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]

View catalog

Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason  


[Home] [Manage]



[ Rules ] [ an / foe / ma / mp3 / vg / vn ] [ cr / fig / navi ] [ mai / ot / so / tat ] [ arc / ddl / irc / lol / ns / pic ] [ home ]