What pissed you off today?

[XJDenton]

I think the cards are neat. You may not be bothered that they are, but French suited playing cards ARE patriarchal. And you aren't required to use these new ones.

Never say never - I know there are practical exceptions - but I'm always leery when things are just assumed to be "bad" just because.    You say "patriarchal" in a way that implies that.   There IS an order to many things in life, and to act or teach that there isn't giving our kids the full measure of what life is like.  Whether it's something basic like the food chain, or something more of a construct like the hierarchy at work... it's not the foundation for a healthy world view IMO.

This is probably gonna veer into P/R territory so if you wish to continue this line of discussion I suggest we take it over there?

[Stadler]

HAHA, I just wrote a reply and as I hit "post" yours came up; my first line was "It's another discussion for another thread, I suppose..."

It's up to Lethean.

[XJDenton]

Just trying to keep the peace.

[Lethean]

It's not up to me.  If you'd rather move it there, or the rules say it's necessary, I don't have a problem with that.  I probably won't have much time to respond today whether it's here or there, but that doesn't mean you two can't.

[Adami]

The patriarchy isn't assumed bad "just because."

The patriarchy is not a universal constant that is necessary for society to thrive. Why you would compare men being in control and superior to a general concept of hierarchy in certain circumstances is odd, unless you really do think men are and should be at the top which I doubt you do.


So being anti-patriarchy isn't some form of anarchy that seeks to eliminate all forms of order and establish unbridled chaos. But for anyone who isn't a man that enjoys it, the patriarchy IS a pretty bad thing, just like a matriarchy would be.


Also it's a god damn novelty card set. Why are we caring so much? Why do we feel so threatened? No one's dicks are shrinking in size because someone made a novelty card set.

[XJDenton]

Why don't we all settle on a neutral hierarchy where we can all agree that one is clearly superior to the other:

Jack -> New York Yankees
Queen -> Chicago Cubs
King ->Tampa Bay Rays

[Stadler]

The patriarchy isn't assumed bad "just because."

The patriarchy is not a universal constant that is necessary for society to thrive. Why you would compare men being in control and superior to a general concept of hierarchy in certain circumstances is odd, unless you really do think men are and should be at the top which I doubt you do.


So being anti-patriarchy isn't some form of anarchy that seeks to eliminate all forms of order and establish unbridled chaos. But for anyone who isn't a man that enjoys it, the patriarchy IS a pretty bad thing, just like a matriarchy would be.

Well, perhaps I'm being less formal with the notion of "patriarchy"; I'm not looking at it as strictly "male dominated"; the Queen is, in fact, the second or third most powerful card in any deck (and in some games, THE most powerful).  I'm looking at this as more of a hierarchical construct, and learning to accept that even if it's populated in ways that can be miscontrued or interpreted.  In other words, we live in a hierarchical society, and wishing away those moments in time where a man sits at the apex - not necessarily a true "patriarchy" - isn't productive.

Also it's a god damn novelty card set. Why are we caring so much? Why do we feel so threatened? No one's dicks are shrinking in size because someone made a novelty card set.

My dick is fine, thanks for asking. ; for me, it's less about "cards" and more an intellectual discussion on the merits of these endeavors generally.   I frankly don't care about the cards themselves at all, just the reaction TO the cards.

[Adami]

If you feel like hearing "Patriarchy is bad" and translating it as "all hierarchies are bad" then you are just simply wrong. And the Queen being the 2nd or 3rd most powerful is kind of the point.

[King Postwhore]

My ears are burning.

[Stadler]

If you feel like hearing "Patriarchy is bad" and translating it as "all hierarchies are bad" then you are just simply wrong. And the Queen being the 2nd or 3rd most powerful is kind of the point.

Good thing I'm not doing that, then.  I'M not saying all hierarchies are bad; kind of the opposite.   

[Adami]

If you feel like hearing "Patriarchy is bad" and translating it as "all hierarchies are bad" then you are just simply wrong. And the Queen being the 2nd or 3rd most powerful is kind of the point.

Good thing I'm not doing that, then.  I'M not saying all hierarchies are bad; kind of the opposite.

That is my point. You're talking about all hierarchies. The card person is talking about a patriarchy only. By changing it to something SO broad, you're dismissing the point. Which, disagree with it or not, has merit.

[jingle.boy]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

[Adami]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

I get that. To answer your question......I assume at least one felt that way? And beyond the creator, at least enough people to keep it in some kind of business. Probably not a ton though.

I agree, totally agree, that it's silly. That this is so far away from the ACTUAL problems they're trying to address that it's....well...silly. However, for most of us, we lack any real power. So a lot of people who feel powerless want to try to find some way to help. Even if that way isn't really helping at all, but just being....silly.

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

[pg1067]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

x100

Here's the thing:  if playing cards had (Ace), Queen, Knave, Lady in Waiting, absolutely no one would give a shit.  What's next?  Are we going to start re-writing Shakespeare in the interest of "gender equality."

Are you sad that you don't feel special (said rhetorically and not to anyone in particular)?  Too damn bad.

[Adami]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

x100

Here's the thing:  if playing cards had (Ace), Queen, Knave, Lady in Waiting, absolutely no one would give a shit.  What's next?  Are we going to start re-writing Shakespeare in the interest of "gender equality."

Are you sad that you don't feel special (said rhetorically and not to anyone in particular)?  Too damn bad.

This kind of response doesn't seem too helpful either.

[Lethean]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

I get that. To answer your question......I assume at least one felt that way? And beyond the creator, at least enough people to keep it in some kind of business. Probably not a ton though.

I agree, totally agree, that it's silly. That this is so far away from the ACTUAL problems they're trying to address that it's....well...silly. However, for most of us, we lack any real power. So a lot of people who feel powerless want to try to find some way to help. Even if that way isn't really helping at all, but just being....silly.

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I mostly agree with Adami.  I perhaps don't think it's quite as silly.  I mean, it is silly in a way.  You could rightly say that there are much more important things to think about and better things to spend your time on than decks of cards.  But... There are a lot of things we all care about that are probably quite silly - a lot sillier than this.  A lot of things we spend our time on when we could be doing something more important.  This is something she cares about, it was within her power to create it, so she did.  I think it's cool and I'd be happy to see it take off.  If it did, does that mean all our gender issues would magically be resolved?  Of course not.  The cards aren't, as jingle says above, suppressing anyone.  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.  It's one of those things that on it's own, doesn't mean much.  But it's never just one thing.  It's cumulative.  So if someone wants to create a pack of cards as their small way of making a change, great.  If people buy said cards, great.  I think it's far sillier to spend time getting angry about the cards existing than to have spent time creating them.

[Stadler]

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I had a pretty intense conversation with my daughter on this; she's... I wouldn't say "woke", but she's very aware, and while she's my kid, she's done a phenomenal job of integrating these concepts into her daily life.  She would never look at the cards and say "my goodness, why isn't the Queen of equal or higher value to the King?!!?"  But she would say "hey, I get you're "raising awareness", but that's just not enough if you're looking to move the needle."

Increasingly, the alternatives aren't available, or they're available with caveat or at cost.  And when that happens, whether someone "feels better" or not isn't really the point anymore.  That's when we move from "The Wiz" - a pleasant and creative idea that didn't change cultures or mindsets - to (and I'm not talking about identity politics issues here) Star Wars, where an entire generation is getting a warped view of history through the eyes of a very small group, if not an individual person. There is power in truth, and as a result people are scared of it (across the spectrum).

[Adami]

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I had a pretty intense conversation with my daughter on this; she's... I wouldn't say "woke", but she's very aware, and while she's my kid, she's done a phenomenal job of integrating these concepts into her daily life.  She would never look at the cards and say "my goodness, why isn't the Queen of equal or higher value to the King?!!?"  But she would say "hey, I get you're "raising awareness", but that's just not enough if you're looking to move the needle."

Increasingly, the alternatives aren't available, or they're available with caveat or at cost.  And when that happens, whether someone "feels better" or not isn't really the point anymore.  That's when we move from "The Wiz" - a pleasant and creative idea that didn't change cultures or mindsets - to (and I'm not talking about identity politics issues here) Star Wars, where an entire generation is getting a warped view of history through the eyes of a very small group, if not an individual person. There is power in truth, and as a result people are scared of it (across the spectrum).

I'll be honest, I really didn't follow your second paragraph. I think I addressed your main point in your first paragraph, but I'm lost on your second one. Is it just "feeling better isn't important"? I'd appreciate a take two.

[Stadler]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

I get that. To answer your question......I assume at least one felt that way? And beyond the creator, at least enough people to keep it in some kind of business. Probably not a ton though.

I agree, totally agree, that it's silly. That this is so far away from the ACTUAL problems they're trying to address that it's....well...silly. However, for most of us, we lack any real power. So a lot of people who feel powerless want to try to find some way to help. Even if that way isn't really helping at all, but just being....silly.

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I mostly agree with Adami.  I perhaps don't think it's quite as silly.  I mean, it is silly in a way.  You could rightly say that there are much more important things to think about and better things to spend your time on than decks of cards.  But... There are a lot of things we all care about that are probably quite silly - a lot sillier than this.  A lot of things we spend our time on when we could be doing something more important.  This is something she cares about, it was within her power to create it, so she did.  I think it's cool and I'd be happy to see it take off.  If it did, does that mean all our gender issues would magically be resolved?  Of course not.  The cards aren't, as jingle says above, suppressing anyone.  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.  It's one of those things that on it's own, doesn't mean much.  But it's never just one thing.  It's cumulative.  So if someone wants to create a pack of cards as their small way of making a change, great.  If people buy said cards, great.  I think it's far sillier to spend time getting angry about the cards existing than to have spent time creating them.

That's all true, and if it was that benign, I'd be in full agreement.  Too often, though, it doesn't stop there.  How long before those decks swap out cards at schools.  Or in casinos.   Then, of course,  there's the next step, where those that "don't care" that "don't use them" are judged for such.  We're already there.  I had a conversation with someone in PM about this vis-a-vis Trump.  As bad as Jan. 6th was, the narrative moved very quickly to delineate two camps: those that accept Biden unequivocally, and the "unhinged", "domestic terrorists". You make it sound like a choice, and there is no choice.  Not today, not for someone that isn't interested in being a meme, or becoming a cause celebre.

[Adami]

Stads, you're sounding kind of ....not rational...there.

Some person creates a deck of cards that I have not heard about anywhere other than DTF and suddenly you're a terrorist if you don't blindly support it? Come on man.

Do I get to say the same thing if someone creates a Trump deck of cards? Or a Christian themed one? 

Take it easy man. People are allowed to make a novelty card deck. No one's changing the world and fighting against THAT is just getting a bit.....irrational.

The world is fine. The traditional cards aren't going anywhere. You're not a nazi or terrorist or whatever. It's fine.

[Lethean]

To be clear, between the image I first posted, and the link that pg posted, this girl didn't come up with this concept over a patriarchal issue.  It was for a (perceived) gender-equality issue.  The part that "pissed" me off (again, too strong.. but mildly annoyed isn't strong enough) is the 'wokeness' of people that are looking for a problem where none exists.  Are girls around the world that play cards realizing that they Jack/Queen/King structure of a deck of cards is something that is suppressing them, and reinforcing gender stereotypes and societal hierarchy of men v women?  That the Queen has a glass ceiling that she can't break thru?  Like, c'mon.

I get that. To answer your question......I assume at least one felt that way? And beyond the creator, at least enough people to keep it in some kind of business. Probably not a ton though.

I agree, totally agree, that it's silly. That this is so far away from the ACTUAL problems they're trying to address that it's....well...silly. However, for most of us, we lack any real power. So a lot of people who feel powerless want to try to find some way to help. Even if that way isn't really helping at all, but just being....silly.

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I mostly agree with Adami.  I perhaps don't think it's quite as silly.  I mean, it is silly in a way.  You could rightly say that there are much more important things to think about and better things to spend your time on than decks of cards.  But... There are a lot of things we all care about that are probably quite silly - a lot sillier than this.  A lot of things we spend our time on when we could be doing something more important.  This is something she cares about, it was within her power to create it, so she did.  I think it's cool and I'd be happy to see it take off.  If it did, does that mean all our gender issues would magically be resolved?  Of course not.  The cards aren't, as jingle says above, suppressing anyone.  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.  It's one of those things that on it's own, doesn't mean much.  But it's never just one thing.  It's cumulative.  So if someone wants to create a pack of cards as their small way of making a change, great.  If people buy said cards, great.  I think it's far sillier to spend time getting angry about the cards existing than to have spent time creating them.

That's all true, and if it was that benign, I'd be in full agreement.  Too often, though, it doesn't stop there.  How long before those decks swap out cards at schools.  Or in casinos.   Then, of course,  there's the next step, where those that "don't care" that "don't use them" are judged for such.  We're already there.  I had a conversation with someone in PM about this vis-a-vis Trump.  As bad as Jan. 6th was, the narrative moved very quickly to delineate two camps: those that accept Biden unequivocally, and the "unhinged", "domestic terrorists". You make it sound like a choice, and there is no choice.  Not today, not for someone that isn't interested in being a meme, or becoming a cause celebre.

But to my thinking - if it *does* swap out cards in schools and casinos - that's a good thing.  The world isn't a worse place for it.  Maybe it's a slightly better place for girls.  And if other things like that are done as well, even better.

Adami is right - right now these are novelty cards.  Nothing is actually happening.  But if it did - it doesn't hurt you.

[Stadler]

If it gets to the point where casinos feel the need to replace their cards with these or things are being pushed very hard to replace traditional cards, I'll be more annoyed then. But right now, as silly as it is, and boy is it, the simple act of making it available and nothing else doesn't seem to be a reason to be too terribly annoyed. I'm sure somewhere they're doing all female renditions of 12 Angry People. I saw a (very good actually) all black rendition of Much Ado About Nothing on PBS. I'm pretty positive there's a completely LGTB rendition of West Side Story being done somewhere. As of now, it's just a chance for people who DO feel opressed to voice that in someway without altering the world for the rest of us. If I want to watch 12 Angry Men, I have 2 fantastic versions readily available (well, one is admittedly more difficult to find). I can very easily find a traditional Much Ado About Nothing, and if I want to watch West Side Story, the original is always available. Similarly, if I go to literally any business that sells cards, I will see traditional cards and will likely never see these. So I just say "huh, that's unique" and move on, if it doesn't speak to me. It doesn't impact me at all, but maybe it makes a few people feel better.

I had a pretty intense conversation with my daughter on this; she's... I wouldn't say "woke", but she's very aware, and while she's my kid, she's done a phenomenal job of integrating these concepts into her daily life.  She would never look at the cards and say "my goodness, why isn't the Queen of equal or higher value to the King?!!?"  But she would say "hey, I get you're "raising awareness", but that's just not enough if you're looking to move the needle."

Increasingly, the alternatives aren't available, or they're available with caveat or at cost.  And when that happens, whether someone "feels better" or not isn't really the point anymore.  That's when we move from "The Wiz" - a pleasant and creative idea that didn't change cultures or mindsets - to (and I'm not talking about identity politics issues here) Star Wars, where an entire generation is getting a warped view of history through the eyes of a very small group, if not an individual person. There is power in truth, and as a result people are scared of it (across the spectrum).

I'll be honest, I really didn't follow your second paragraph. I think I addressed your main point in your first paragraph, but I'm lost on your second one. Is it just "feeling better isn't important"? I'd appreciate a take two.

I think I answered it better to Lethean. I think you're taking for granted that those alternatives are there and always will be.  We have the new versions of the Our Gang/Little Rascals troupe (there are two movies I think) and they all lead us conclusively to the (right) conclusion that there is no place for "He-Man Woman Hater's Club"'s in today's society, but we don't have the originals, at least not in unedited form. 

[Adami]

I dunno dude. Sometimes that's progress. Sometimes it's not.

You know I disagree with censorship (or at least I've made it quite clear) but change isn't censorship. If having traditional playing cards becomes illegal or can land you in some sort of legal trouble or make you fear for your life/safety, we'll talk. Other than that, it's just change.

I'll also point out that, as far as I know, despite all the whining and complaining and k'vetching by the more fragile people out there, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer is still readily available and hasn't been replaced by a "woke" version. All of that doomsday talk was for naught.

[Stadler]

Stads, you're sounding kind of ....not rational...there.

Some person creates a deck of cards that I have not heard about anywhere other than DTF and suddenly you're a terrorist if you don't blindly support it? Come on man.

Do I get to say the same thing if someone creates a Trump deck of cards? Or a Christian themed one? 

Take it easy man. People are allowed to make a novelty card deck. No one's changing the world and fighting against THAT is just getting a bit.....irrational.

The world is fine. The traditional cards aren't going anywhere. You're not a nazi or terrorist or whatever. It's fine.

You and Lethean seem to be moving the bar, and ignoring the parts that are relevant in doing so.  I've already said I agree IF it's just a novelty card issue. I don't give a rat's ass about the cards generally, and I agree it's a silly thing in and of itself.  I'm saying though, that the world is anything but "fine" and I'm not necessarily taking for granted that the traditional cards aren't going anywhere.  These things tend to get a life of their own.  Look what Lethean said: so what if it does, it "doesn't hurt me".  One, you don't get to decide what "hurts me" any more than I can tell someone else what "offends them", but even if it doesn't hurt me - and no, it doesn't hurt ME, personally - but it's generally not benign, and it does hurt, all of us, when the narrative starts to carry judgment.  You guys are all good, because you're all firmly on the right side of history, but for those that are perhaps more in that gray area that seems to be dwindling like the Brazilian rain forest, it's not so clear.

[Adami]

Just sounds like, IF that were to happen, which it won't, it's something you don't personally like.

Tough. You don't get to like everything that happens. Sometimes change means something you don't agree with. Sometimes it means something I don't agree with. If you feel very passionately about putting traditional cards back in casinos and schools (why are they in schools?) in this fictional reality where the woke crowd has risen up and taken over the world, then fight for it.

I don't like having bibles in hotels. Tough for me.

I don't like lots of different changes that happen. Sucks for me. If I cared enough, I'd fight for it.

Also, we didn't move a bar. You did. All that was presented here was a novelty set of cards. That's where the bar is. This fictional world where they've taken over and replaced all the traditional cards is moving the bar.

Also, not a big point, but it looks like Our Gang is readily available on DVD. Am I missing something there?

[Stadler]

Just sounds like, IF that were to happen, which it won't, it's something you don't personally like.

Tough. You don't get to like everything that happens. Sometimes change means something you don't agree with. Sometimes it means something I don't agree with. If you feel very passionately about putting traditional cards back in casinos and schools (why are they in schools?) in this fictional reality where the woke crowd has risen up and taken over the world, then fight for it.

I don't like having bibles in hotels. Tough for me.

I don't like lots of different changes that happen. Sucks for me. If I cared enough, I'd fight for it.

Also, we didn't move a bar. You did. All that was presented here was a novelty set of cards. That's where the bar is. This fictional world where they've taken over and replaced all the traditional cards is moving the bar.

Also, not a big point, but it looks like Our Gang is readily available on DVD. Am I missing something there?

Look, I'm the first one to say "tough".  I'm also the first one - sometimes the only one - that says "my personal feelings don't matter".    I'm also - usually - fine with change.    If you think that's the answer, you're misunderstanding my point.   My point is about the apparent inconsistencies that almost invariably crop up when these issues start to arise.   "Tough"?   "Deal with it"?  I'll remember that the next time the deck of cards is modified the OTHER way.  You know full well there's a double standard here, and that's all I'm going to say for now.


As for Our Gang, yes, but HEAVILY edited (many episodes are barely half the length), and with entire episodes missing.

[Ben_Jamin]

Just sounds like, IF that were to happen, which it won't, it's something you don't personally like.

Tough. You don't get to like everything that happens. Sometimes change means something you don't agree with. Sometimes it means something I don't agree with. If you feel very passionately about putting traditional cards back in casinos and schools (why are they in schools?) in this fictional reality where the woke crowd has risen up and taken over the world, then fight for it.

I don't like having bibles in hotels. Tough for me.

I don't like lots of different changes that happen. Sucks for me. If I cared enough, I'd fight for it.

Also, we didn't move a bar. You did. All that was presented here was a novelty set of cards. That's where the bar is. This fictional world where they've taken over and replaced all the traditional cards is moving the bar.

Also, not a big point, but it looks like Our Gang is readily available on DVD. Am I missing something there?

Look, I'm the first one to say "tough".  I'm also the first one - sometimes the only one - that says "my personal feelings don't matter".    I'm also - usually - fine with change.    If you think that's the answer, you're misunderstanding my point.   My point is about the apparent inconsistencies that almost invariably crop up when these issues start to arise.   "Tough"?   "Deal with it"?  I'll remember that the next time the deck of cards is modified the OTHER way.  You know full well there's a double standard here, and that's all I'm going to say for now.


As for Our Gang, yes, but HEAVILY edited (many episodes are barely half the length), and with entire episodes missing.

I wonder if they still have that one where they go in the woods and make a fire, and then see Big Foot, they all leave while the black kid stays. And then ends up getting shanked by Big Foot.

I had a VHS of Our Gang episodes and some of them were pretty out there. Good documentation of the times...

[jingle.boy]

I personally agree with most of the points made immediately after my last one by Adami, Lethean, pg.  One point I disagree with however ...

  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.

Yeah... I can't get on board with this line of thinking.  I don't think you're wrong or judge you at all dude, but on this we'll just agree to disagree.

On the path that Stads took us down, I see his point, even if I don't think it's ever going to come to fruition.  Let's say this turns into a Social Justice Warrior movement.  Hoyle's gets pressured to replace their designs.  Casino and Poker Leagues pressured and/or boycotted if they don't jump on the bandwagon.  That's where the bar moves and becomes forced upon people, and therein lies the potential problem... forcing ones views on broader society or face the consequences.

Again, not that I think this particular issue would go that far - they're playing cards, ffs!  But, it has been seen on other issues of greater significance.

[Lethean]

Just sounds like, IF that were to happen, which it won't, it's something you don't personally like.

Tough. You don't get to like everything that happens. Sometimes change means something you don't agree with. Sometimes it means something I don't agree with. If you feel very passionately about putting traditional cards back in casinos and schools (why are they in schools?) in this fictional reality where the woke crowd has risen up and taken over the world, then fight for it.

I don't like having bibles in hotels. Tough for me.

I don't like lots of different changes that happen. Sucks for me. If I cared enough, I'd fight for it.

Also, we didn't move a bar. You did. All that was presented here was a novelty set of cards. That's where the bar is. This fictional world where they've taken over and replaced all the traditional cards is moving the bar.

Also, not a big point, but it looks like Our Gang is readily available on DVD. Am I missing something there?

Look, I'm the first one to say "tough".  I'm also the first one - sometimes the only one - that says "my personal feelings don't matter".    I'm also - usually - fine with change.    If you think that's the answer, you're misunderstanding my point.   My point is about the apparent inconsistencies that almost invariably crop up when these issues start to arise.   "Tough"?   "Deal with it"?  I'll remember that the next time the deck of cards is modified the OTHER way.  You know full well there's a double standard here, and that's all I'm going to say for now.


As for Our Gang, yes, but HEAVILY edited (many episodes are barely half the length), and with entire episodes missing.

I've never heard of Our Gang, so no comment there.

To your other point, I don't see a double standard at all. If the cards all changed to where the queen was more valuable, and you were told "tough," and then they started changing back to the king being more powerful and you weren't "allowed" to say "tough" - that's a double standard.  Not the scenario that's before us now.  But for what it's worth, while I more or less agree with Adami's post, I generally don't agree that just saying "tough" to someone who is upset about change (moving to neutral cards in this case) is the way to go.  It's tempting after reading some of the ridiculous comments on that fb post and seeing how enraged some got.  But usually I think it's better to try to take a measured approach.

I personally agree with most of the points made immediately after my last one by Adami, Lethean, pg.  One point I disagree with however ...

  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.

Yeah... I can't get on board with this line of thinking.  I don't think you're wrong or judge you at all dude, but on this we'll just agree to disagree.

On the path that Stads took us down, I see his point, even if I don't think it's ever going to come to fruition.  Let's say this turns into a Social Justice Warrior movement.  Hoyle's gets pressured to replace their designs.  Casino and Poker Leagues pressured and/or boycotted if they don't jump on the bandwagon.  That's where the bar moves and becomes forced upon people, and therein lies the potential problem... forcing ones views on broader society or face the consequences.

Again, not that I think this particular issue would go that far - they're playing cards, ffs!  But, it has been seen on other issues of greater significance.

I don't generally agree with bad behavior, but I don't think the potential for it should stop people from trying to create change.  I'm not sure if that makes sense.   It would be (and always is) bad behavior to write hateful posts on a casino's social media, call up the owner and harass them, etc.  Hopefully no one will ever do that over a deck of cards, but I suppose someone could because that's what some people do.  But I don't think that possiblity should have prevented the creator from making the cards nor should it prevent her from trying to have various places slowly start to change to something neutral since that seems to be important to her. 

[Ben_Jamin]

Just sounds like, IF that were to happen, which it won't, it's something you don't personally like.

Tough. You don't get to like everything that happens. Sometimes change means something you don't agree with. Sometimes it means something I don't agree with. If you feel very passionately about putting traditional cards back in casinos and schools (why are they in schools?) in this fictional reality where the woke crowd has risen up and taken over the world, then fight for it.

I don't like having bibles in hotels. Tough for me.

I don't like lots of different changes that happen. Sucks for me. If I cared enough, I'd fight for it.

Also, we didn't move a bar. You did. All that was presented here was a novelty set of cards. That's where the bar is. This fictional world where they've taken over and replaced all the traditional cards is moving the bar.

Also, not a big point, but it looks like Our Gang is readily available on DVD. Am I missing something there?

Look, I'm the first one to say "tough".  I'm also the first one - sometimes the only one - that says "my personal feelings don't matter".    I'm also - usually - fine with change.    If you think that's the answer, you're misunderstanding my point.   My point is about the apparent inconsistencies that almost invariably crop up when these issues start to arise.   "Tough"?   "Deal with it"?  I'll remember that the next time the deck of cards is modified the OTHER way.  You know full well there's a double standard here, and that's all I'm going to say for now.


As for Our Gang, yes, but HEAVILY edited (many episodes are barely half the length), and with entire episodes missing.

I've never heard of Our Gang, so no comment there.

To your other point, I don't see a double standard at all. If the cards all changed to where the queen was more valuable, and you were told "tough," and then they started changing back to the king being more powerful and you weren't "allowed" to say "tough" - that's a double standard.  Not the scenario that's before us now.  But for what it's worth, while I more or less agree with Adami's post, I generally don't agree that just saying "tough" to someone who is upset about change (moving to neutral cards in this case) is the way to go.  It's tempting after reading some of the ridiculous comments on that fb post and seeing how enraged some got.  But usually I think it's better to try to take a measured approach.

I personally agree with most of the points made immediately after my last one by Adami, Lethean, pg.  One point I disagree with however ...

  But do they contribute to/reinforce stereotypes?  I think they probably do.  In a small subtle way.

Yeah... I can't get on board with this line of thinking.  I don't think you're wrong or judge you at all dude, but on this we'll just agree to disagree.

On the path that Stads took us down, I see his point, even if I don't think it's ever going to come to fruition.  Let's say this turns into a Social Justice Warrior movement.  Hoyle's gets pressured to replace their designs.  Casino and Poker Leagues pressured and/or boycotted if they don't jump on the bandwagon.  That's where the bar moves and becomes forced upon people, and therein lies the potential problem... forcing ones views on broader society or face the consequences.

Again, not that I think this particular issue would go that far - they're playing cards, ffs!  But, it has been seen on other issues of greater significance.

I don't generally agree with bad behavior, but I don't think the potential for it should stop people from trying to create change.  I'm not sure if that makes sense.   It would be (and always is) bad behavior to write hateful posts on a casino's social media, call up the owner and harass them, etc.  Hopefully no one will ever do that over a deck of cards, but I suppose someone could because that's what some people do.  But I don't think that possiblity should have prevented the creator from making the cards nor should it prevent her from trying to have various places slowly start to change to something neutral since that seems to be important to her.

I say the playing card value should be determined by Who is ruling the Monarchy. Since the Queen of England is the head, then the Queen would be worth more value. 

[Stadler]

I don't generally agree with bad behavior, but I don't think the potential for it should stop people from trying to create change.  I'm not sure if that makes sense.   It would be (and always is) bad behavior to write hateful posts on a casino's social media, call up the owner and harass them, etc.  Hopefully no one will ever do that over a deck of cards, but I suppose someone could because that's what some people do.  But I don't think that possiblity should have prevented the creator from making the cards nor should it prevent her from trying to have various places slowly start to change to something neutral since that seems to be important to her.

Not just to you, but to Adami and Jingle as well:  Okay, I'll back off.  But maybe it's because I'm sensitive to it, I see a LOT of what I'm talking about every day.  Maybe it's too subtle for all to see, maybe you see it and don't care, maybe some combo in between.  But there is JUDGMENT attached to even these little gestures.   Particularly when attached to identity politics issues, the change is NOT OPTIONAL (and no I don't mean everyone HAS to change cards, I mean in terms of agreeing to the change).

[JayOctavarium]

Outdoor dining is back for California. That specifically doesn't piss me off. It's the fact that these places weren't following anything close to safe practices before outdoor dining was shut down back in Dec, nor were they following anything safe practices while it was shut down, and now that it's back open I see the same shit as before. Huge crowds of people crammed into the "tents" set up in the parking spaces along the streets.

That doesn't effect me personally..

But

The fact that these people have seemed to have forgotten what crosswalks are, or to at bare minimum look both ways before running across a street....does

[Kotowboy]

I love when you're just walking along the pavement (sidewark) and someone just barrels out of a shop without looking and almost ploughs into you.

Then they glare at you like it's your fault 

It's shocking how many people do this. Or just stand in the doorway of a shop on their phones. Or stand in the aisle of a supermarket with their trolley at arms length etc etc.

It does seem to be the older generation. When you get older - do you just lose the part of your brain that handles spatial awareness ? 

The fact that these people have seemed to have forgotten what crosswalks are, or to at bare minimum look both ways before running across a street....does

Jay I find people's behaviour at pedestrian crossings fascinating.

- Some will just cross the road when it's obviously safe
- Some will press the button and wait for the signal - even though the road is empty in both directions
- And the strangest of all - the people who get to a crossing when the light is RED - the cars have all STOPPED - it says CROSS and it's BEEPING , and
they literally press the button and WAIT  .

Where I used to live - to get to my music degree - there was two lanes of traffic and I had worked out the timing. So if I saw the far side go green - i'd count five seconds
then just waltz into traffic knowing full well it would change to RED by the time the cars got near me 

[PetFish]

Don't even get me started on crosswalks but I guess I'll get started on crosswalks.


1) People who press the button over and over and over and over and keep pressing it until the light changes and they think to themselves "YES!  I was trying to make it think there's 100 people here all wanting to cross so it had better hurry up and change and it worked!"

This is toddler-level thinking but somehow it survives education into adulthood that somehow you're fooling the signal when the reality is that ONE SINGLE PRESS tells it that there's someone wanting to cross and it'll activate the WALK sign at the next change or, in the case of flashing-light crosswalks, pretty much instantly.


2)  Most of the intersections in my city have pedestrian-activated buttons... BUT THEY DON'T DO SHIT.

I'll be driving to work at 6am, nobody around, and I'll approach an intersection, I have the green light, there's NOBODY crossing my path, and THE LIGHT STOPS ME FOR NO REASON just so that NOBODY WILL CROSS IN FRONT OF ME.  So I sit there for 45-60s doing nothing waiting for nothing.  So on my drive to work I go through about 20 intersections and I'm guaranteed to be stopped at half of them for no reason.

The worst part is that the PEDESTRIAN "WALK" SIGNAL ALSO ACTIVATES even thought there's NO PEDESTRIANS THERE and NOBODY PRESSED THE FRIGGIN' BUTTON.  So why the frack is it changing at all?

If the WALK light activates anyway then why even have a pedestrian button at all?  In the downtown core where there's constant foot traffic then it makes sense to just always have the walk lights activate but it shouldn't be happening anywhere else.


3)  Pedestrian buttons that don't do anything.  One example is that there's 3 crosswalks in front of my hospital, all with buttons, but pushing them does nothing.  It doesn't speed anything up, and it doesn't tell it to activate the WALK light, it just does it every time at a set interval.  Again, it's 6am, there's NOBODY around, and these lights just change at their set time and activate the WALK light for no reason so I'm sitting there for 45-60s doing nothing.

So why install pedestrian-activated controls if they don't do anything?  Why install those in-ground car detectors that let the red light know someone is waiting if the light just changes anyway regardless?

I tried contacting my city about it and they said that sometimes they malfunction, which is fine, but this isn't a malfunction at all, they've actually been set up this way.  You want to keep traffic flowing?  Here's a major problem that seemingly would be easy to fix.

 


PS - My wife will walk all the way down the block to a crosswalk instead of jaywalk over an empty street.

 

[Kotowboy]

1) People who press the button over and over and over and over and keep pressing it until the light changes and they think to themselves "YES!  I was trying to make it think there's 100 people here all wanting to cross so it had better hurry up and change and it worked!"

Same with people who press the button for the lift over and over and over as if it will come quicker.

ALSO - some traffic lights are on a timer - so pressing it literally does NOTHING except make you feel like you did something.

PS - My wife will walk all the way down the block to a crosswalk instead of jaywalk over an empty street.

Haha. I love seeing that level of Pavlovian thinking.

I don't know what the rule is in the US and A - but here I was told that if you're driving and you basically are unable to stop for the red light safely - you are technically allowed to

drive thru it. It's a bit annoying when you have to catch a bus and you get one of those drivers who slows down when the light is green in case it changes at the last second.