Things you don't need to know…

The truly pathetic part being, at least one fool will actually purchase this thing. I bet.

As a reader of adult comics and member of an adult gaming site I'm not surprised. I've seen worse and have played worse on that site. No worse then that bum simulator.

*The above no way endorses such games and is just my personal opinion.

Of course it was someone on The Codex who pointed it out.

Lol, yeah. I always think I'd be curious to see the actual state of the internet's sexual tyrannosaurs that go around calling people cucks.

You'd be surprised as some men and women love to see their partners have sex with other people. Shit it even has it's own comic genre with many sub-genres.

Cuck = cuckold = cuckquean means the same damn thing.

*Don't confuse this with swinging that's different. The more you know.

Yes, I'm sure people that actually engage in it as a fetish come in all sorts (erm…).

But I just always find that the characters that bandy the term around as an insult suggest a certain type, that is perhaps far away from what they like to imagine.

Every fetish exists online. It's nothing so taboo. I wouldn't do it but if people have fun with it more power to them.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Of course it was someone on The Codex who pointed it out.

Why, was it a site for Incels?

Originally Posted by bkrueger
Which posting?

Reminds me of the story, where somebody visits a psychologist:

Patient: My problem is, that everybody ignores me.
Psychologist: Who is next, please?

Yeah ! I know that !

Originally Posted by bkrueger
Why, was it a site for Incels?

I wouldn't be shocked to discover that some of them fall into that category.

Originally Posted by SveNitoR
Well, in a way most things are political. And I also assumed he meant it like that, but I'm not sure. He enjoys semi trolling sometimes, and sometimes jokes, and sometimes it's serious. It's hard to know with him sometimes.

I got an "infraction" in another forum because I bitterly complained about the lack of "colours" in games … and in gaming in general …
Someone apparingly thought I meant "coloured people" or something. Next time I write "blue, green, yellow, red" instead …

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
I got an "infraction" in another forum because I bitterly complained about the lack of "colours" in games … and in gaming in general …
Someone apparingly thought I meant "coloured people" or something. Next time I write "blue, green, yellow, red" instead …

You absolute monster!

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
I got an "infraction" in another forum because I bitterly complained about the lack of "colours" in games … and in gaming in general …
Someone apparingly thought I meant "coloured people" or something. Next time I write "blue, green, yellow, red" instead …

Are you sure you didn't get the infraction because of an unacceptable lack of taste?

It was a case of bad wording on my side, and I realized that only later.
I wrote these something similar to my posting here . https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/show…8&postcount=45
There, "lack of colours" actually means "black" as the preferred colour of

- steam
- GOG
- that Saturn shop
- now even MS Office gets a "dark Mode" !

and I used the word "colours".

Apparingly, the moderator thought I meant with "coloures" so to say "black people", as "coloured" is a term so far often used to mean "black people".

Edit : I have dug out my "now deleted" posting.

This is the original :

People only play what has the most powah. It's a man's thing. In a patriarchate, men are supposed to be strong, not weak. Therefore in video games they assume strong roles, not weak ones. Which has resulted in game titles like "Godslayer" or even "Godeater", because of powah.

This will only go away once men begin to emancipate themselves from the roles the patriarchates press them into.

For exaple, artists as playable classes in games ? Even the (A)D&D Bard is - at least in this video game - a fighting class ! Everything becomes streamlined into a class of power. Fighting = executing power.

That's why there are no non-combat classes in video games at all. No artist classes, no social classes, no jester classes. Because the patriarchate presses men into playing classes with power. And jesters don't have power, because they are social classes, and social = nonpower.

In the recent age of games emphasizing manlihood (just look at the game box covers !), it is even so that social classes, yes even social behaviour ! is considered as weak and womenlike. Social = weak = women. Which is almost like racism.

(Same goes for colourfulness,m but that's a different topic.)

With "colourfulness" I meant - like in my thread "Where has the Humour gone ?" https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45726
mostly colourfulness with blue, green, yellow, red, etc. - and the lack of colours in

- steam
- GOG
- that Saturn shop
- "dark mode" for MS Office

In my opinion, the lack of colourfulness is - as I tried to describe - a "manly" thing. Teenagers, here, who want to be considered as "manly", dress themselves completely in black.
Which tells me that they are seeing blue, green, red, yellow as "childish", "women-like" = "weak".

This lack of green, red, yellow, blue can also be seen with high-tier managers of corporations. They also dress themselves NOT in green, red, blue, yellow.

Thus, black is regarded as "manly", as "poweful", as "non-weak".

Which is why - imho - many games lack blue, yellow, green, red, lilac etc. .


And the moderator misunderstood that.

Pibbur wrote in the Corona thread about looking better the more his hair hides his face. That made me think about something I read a few years ago: Apparently a reason why people look better in sunglasses is because it hides parts of their face and make them appear more symmetric. Maybe facial hair fills that role as well? Apart from being trendy and making the chin look larger of course…

Originally Posted by SveNitoR
Pibbur wrote in the Corona thread about looking better the more his hair hides his face. That made me think about something I read a few years ago: Apparently a reason why people look better in sunglasses is because it hides parts of their face and make them appear more symmetric. Maybe facial hair fills that role as well? Apart from being trendy and making the chin look larger of course…

Good point about sunglasses! I thought it was simply the fact of being partly hidden and thus looking a bit mysterious - in which case hiding behind long hair should work too.

I'm not sure about the symmetry for unkempt hair though, "savage" is the word that springs to mind instead (or "chewbacca") - but that may work too.

Sunglasses ? Reminds me of a certain song by ZZ Top …

Originally Posted by Redglyph
Good point about sunglasses! I thought it was simply the fact of being partly hidden and thus looking a bit mysterious - in which case hiding behind long hair should work too.



I'm not sure about the symmetry for unkempt hair though, "savage" is the word that springs to mind instead (or "chewbacca") - but that may work too.

I mean, I'm sure there's erotic fan fiction involving Chewbacca, so I guess some people find unkempt hair sexy!

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Sunglasses ? Reminds me of a certain song by ZZ Top …

I know next to nothing about zz top, except they have large beards. What song is it, and what's it saying about sunglasses?

Originally Posted by SveNitoR
I know next to nothing about zz top, except they have large beards. What song is it, and what's it saying about sunglasses?

Don't know it, too. But I like the Corey Hart one in the TIGA version with the Amanda Lepore video…