35
Comments (42)
sorted by:
23
YouAreAPirate 23 points ago +23 / -0

I'm in two minds over this. Is it more "Male Feminist is exposed as a depraved creep, more at 11" or is this "A Lesson that Leftist Business "Ethics" is a losing game".

12
GoofTroop186 12 points ago +12 / -0

The latter. From Ars Technica:

The report pointed directly to the company's battle.net online service team, where "women who were not 'huge gamers' or 'core gamers' and not into the party scene were excluded and treated like outsiders."

10
Tiavor [S] 10 points ago +10 / -0

hahahaha, ofc they are excluded, if you work for a gaming company but have no interest in gaming.

3
Ahaus667 3 points ago +3 / -0

They just want unfettered access to the orbiters.

2
SchwarzesMark 2 points ago +2 / -0

Basically any employee nowadays who treats it as a 9-5 job. The real passion is gone now in AAA gaming so I am not surprised.

3
realerfunction 3 points ago +3 / -0

because they are. objectively.

6
NoGardE 6 points ago +6 / -0

I would guess both, leaning toward the latter. If the heads of your team wanted you gone, an accusation of sexual harassment was the most efficient way to do it. However, if you were a friend of the people running things, you could get away with basically anything shy of a criminal conviction.

1
subbookkeeper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Seems like a win win

14
Galean 14 points ago +14 / -0

They seem exaggerated to be sure, like a woke SJW men hating wet dream to push more women in to the company.

What I find strange is for them to push it now when the company is not doing great to begin with.

9
TheImpossible1 9 points ago +10 / -1

Probably got one of their requests for more man hatred propaganda rejected by Activision.

I don't want to see Activision die, but if it does, maybe the world will wake up to women's actual goals and repeal the "discrimination against women" law.

17
Galean 17 points ago +17 / -0

If Activision dies it will be blamed on "toxic masculinity" inside the company and "toxic masculinity" inside the fanbase.

Is a win-win for them, they get to push propaganda and if it fails they get to push propaganda.

7
TheImpossible1 7 points ago +8 / -1

Publicly maybe, but if I was another game company, I'd start purging women and feminist allies as fast as I could to prevent me being next.

A high profile collapse caused by them would be a blessing, because it gives the right to gatekeep women out.

Repeal "discrimination against women" laws!

5
acp_k2win 5 points ago +7 / -2

all discrimination laws are fundamental violations of property and association rights

6
TheImpossible1 6 points ago +7 / -1

The idea of them is to make sure that minority groups can progress fairly in society.

It doesn't really work when you call the half of the population that are the darlings of all the big corporations and governments "an oppressed minority group"

4
acp_k2win 4 points ago +4 / -0

The idea of them is to make sure that minority groups can progress fairly in society.

Except that isn't how they work at all. In practice it legally sanctions against pattern recognition.

If a business sees that 90% of the shoplifting is done by blacks why shouldn't he be allowed to ban blacks from the store?

-1
TheImpossible1 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Because if everyone could do that, the good people would have nowhere to buy shit because of people who they had nothing to do with.

That would also be a very easy division for our better halves to exploit.

2
ghostfox1_ 2 points ago +2 / -0

Freedom of association.

Gatekeeping and discrimination are sometimes good

1
Brennus 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah because firing only women over a short period of time is not going to open you up to a huge law suit at all.

3
TheImpossible1 3 points ago +3 / -0

After they just destroyed a company worth billions?

Besides, you just sprinkle in some male feminist firings and call it a restructuring.

1
Brennus 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wouldn’t call activision blizzard destroyed. And since it’s you we are talking about, you aren’t talking about only firing women who are responsible with costing the company money. You are saying all of the women even those who do their work and go home with 0 issues. And I already know your response is going to be something around the lines of “all women evil wiwjahdjahavxhd” similar to what all of the game journos and feminist do with gamergate. Youre a broken record with bs identity politics.

1
TheImpossible1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wait for the end of this kangaroo court case before you say that. I want them to prevail, but I highly doubt they will in the long term.

They'll either sell their soul and die that way, or fight it and be killed by large donations from Melinda Gates and the UN to the "legal team" against them to set an example.

8
ThrowawyASAP 8 points ago +8 / -0

Well it is hard for a parasite to kill a healthy host.

3
Galean 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why would it want to kill it, this particular parasite wants to use it to push ideologies, you do not do that with a company that does not have fans to begin with. All I could think off is to use it to push further women in to gaming companies at a global level. Do not be like activision type thing.

4
TheImpossible1 4 points ago +4 / -0

40bn has to be spent somewhere.

There's going to be a lot of things happening regarding them in the next couple of years. They have money to burn and their end goal is closer than ever.

12
KanarWithDamar 12 points ago +15 / -3

Sexual harassment basically doesn't really exist.

Not as it's commonly purported anyways. When something is actually wrong, it's plain wrong. It doesn't matter who it is doing it. Stealing or murder don't become right and just because of who the person committing the crime is*. "Sexual harassment" is something where it's only really a crime or a wrong thing based on who's doing it, which means it's not actually wrong. As the saying goes, creepy is when an unattractive man does something that would be charming, funny, daring, or eye-catching when an attractive man does it. Such is the same with "sexual harassment".

Women trade sex for favors. Protection, resources, social standing, praise, etc. That is what they do. It's built into their genes and has been for tens of thousands of years. That didn't stop being true over the past 100 just because they shouldered their way into men's workplaces. It just another arena for them to do the same stuff they have always done all over the world in every culture in the history of the human species. Just as we can say female black widow spiders eat the males after mating and female lions do the hunting, female humans trade sexual access to males for resources, protection, advancement, and status. It's a biological fact. It has always been true and will always be true, for everyone, everywhere. It's part of being human.

So that being said, sex is on the table in the workplace just as it is anywhere. Women are selling, period. But not everyone is allowed to be a buyer. Sexual harassment is when one of the lower 80% gets out of his lane and thinks he's allowed to make an offer. He's supposed to know better. The bottom 80% of men exist to keep the floors clean, the machines running, their eyes down, and their mouths shut. Sexual harassment is when one of these men gets it in their head to try to do more than that and make an advance. But it's not the advance that is itself wrong, it's the 80 percenter doing it that's wrong. Women are not only fine with it if a top 20% man is doing it, but actively encourage and seek it out. That's one of the major reasons they seek out careers to begin with. It's only harassment when a 'creep' tries to play the game that's only reserved for the top 20% of men, and sexual harassment rules and laws exist to smack those bottom 80% men back down and keep them in their place.

The only exception to this is when it becomes more useful for a woman to sell out a top 20% man and use those rules against him for an even bigger benefit to herself. If she can get a bigger payout, or if an even better top catch man is available, she will immediately turn around and pretend the years she spent gleefully doing what women do, selling access to her body for resources, was wrong all along. The entire #MeToo movement is a demonstration of this fact. When they get too old and can't compete with younger women, or they think they can get a 7 figure check, or enough notoriety to catch the eye of a bigger fish, then those same rules and laws the sisterhood made to hamper the bottom 80% can occasionally be used against a top 20% man.

I don't know why this woman killed herself, but it wasn't because of 'sexual harassment' in the way the training videos and mandatory seminars talk about it. The stereotypical dudebros saying she has a great ass or telling her to smile more, her going home and crying about it and then offing herself. Nah, there is no fucking chance that's how it really went down. The wokists will do their best to pretend that's what happened, but there is a 100% chance that if this chick was fucking one of the 'frat guys', she enthusiastically consented while it was only taking place, and only after did something upset the dynamic (he found a hotter younger model, the advancement or social status she thought she'd gain didn't pan out, etc) and cause her to lose it. This woman was not being harassed and harangued by frat guy dudebros and forced all alone into some corner crying and wailing and finally couldn't take it anymore. There is no chance of that. Whatever really happened, I would bet a year's paycheck she was entirely willingly and enthusiastically going along with it and even encouraged it or got it started to begin with, and then something blew up in her face towards the end, her plan stopped working for her, and then she freaked out and killed herself. I would bet everything on that being true.

*Notice how they're trying to even get things like theft and murder moved from being wrong because they're just plain wrong, to being wrong only if certain people do it, but totally fine if other classes of people do it. The feminists just got there first and got sexual bargaining reclassed to this sort of "wrong sometimes based on who's doing it" thing.

12
TheImpossible1 12 points ago +12 / -0

I don't fully agree with your ideas, but there are a lot of good points here.

The bottom 80% of men exist to keep the floors clean, the machines running, their eyes down, and their mouths shut.

Particularly this. The majority of men aren't judged to be worthy of their presence, in their sick little minds.

Look at OnlyFans culture, it's the clearest demonstration of this. Those women would never care about those men, but they love exploiting them.

11
KanarWithDamar 11 points ago +11 / -0

I'm not saying I know all of what did happen with this chick in the story, but I do know that part of it was she was having sex with her male boss. There is a 0% chance she wasn't on board with it for at least part of the time for her own selfish-advancement reasons. That's just how this works. It's only being reframed as this "poor women suffering sexual harassment by frat guy dudes" after the fact because something didn't go according to plan and blew up in a woman's face.

Any time you hear or read about something where a woman was going along with something for weeks, months, years, and then only after it's made public is she suddenly being painted as a poor victim of those dastardly men, you can bet the farm that she is just as guilty of the situation as the men involved. The only difference is women have an automatic "waahhhh wahhhhh I'm poor and helpless and none of this is my fault" out built in, and they use it every time.

4
TheImpossible1 4 points ago +5 / -1

Oh yeah, I fully agree with that. I just don't believe there's no such thing as sexual harassment - I'm sure there are married women of tradcon beliefs that wouldn't just sleep with their boss because he's attractive.

7
KanarWithDamar 7 points ago +7 / -0

Maybe not their boss, but every woman has her price. It's genetic. The women who refused to sleep with the conquering tribe were all killed off thousands of years ago. Only the ones who were fine with branch-swinging survived long enough to have kids. And when some of those kids were girls, when they grew up and a conquering tribe moved in, the ones who wouldn't branch-swing were killed. And on and on, to the point where branch-swinging is as built into female human nature as anything else. It was just too damn useful for our species for too long to be otherwise. If you want to live and to have babies who will live, you get over your old man and get with the new stronger one.

So yes, there might be some tradcon wives who wouldn't cheat or move up to their particular boss, but you would be able to find some top man somewhere who would be able to pull it off for 99.9999% of them. If they haven't done it yet, it just means they haven't run across the high enough value man to do it with yet. Maybe they never will, and I hope for their husbands that they never do. But it's always possible. Their genes force them to at least be open to the idea just as their genes keep their skin cells replicating or their heart beating.

5
TheImpossible1 5 points ago +6 / -1

Wow, this is a stronger condemnation of them than anything I've ever said, and I've accused them of creating bioweapons.

7
KanarWithDamar 7 points ago +7 / -0

I'm not 'condemning' them per se, just stating what they are. It's like fire. It's dangerous, but useful. If you don't understand it, or misuse it, or don't pay attention to it or keep your eye one it, fire will kill you. But it's still useful and necessary for much of life. Women are what they are. Many of those things are immoral or wrong, but there was a point when those traits were useful for survival. Some of them are still useful. Just as men learned to control fire, every civilization in history put into place some form of rules for women; what they were and were not allowed to do or have a say in, fathers having a say in who they married, men being the head of the household, infidelity laws, etc. From ancient Mesopotamia, to Qin China to the Aztecs, to even the 'progressive' for the time, the Romans, all the way throughout all of human history in every civilization that lasted long enough and made enough of an impact for us to know they existed. Every single one of these civilizations had some kind of 'keep a keen eye and firm grasp on your women' rule.

Such as we are learning with all sorts of things these days. We tossed out so much ancient wisdom and time honored tradition in the 20th century, traditions and wisdom that every culture on earth learned the hard way and baked into their civilization on purpose. The Marxists threw it all away and we're all suffering the result. We're only now rediscovering fundamental basic truths that any tribesman from 700B.C. could have told you as easily as "the sun makes light". One of those is that women, for as necessary as they are to human survival, and as beneficial as they can be to a thriving civilization, like fire, they are only beneficial when the society understands them and places proper controls on them. Fire burns, that's part of what makes it beneficial. Women trade sex for resources, that's part of what makes them beneficial. Both must be understood and controlled and not allowed to flare up and rampage unhindered or else all is destroyed. Well, we let women do whatever they wanted in the 20th century, and they destroyed our civilization as surely as a fire. We're still suffering the effects and it will likely take a Global Collapse for the old wisdom that created and sustained civilization for thousands of years to take hold again. And part of that wisdom everywhere on earth was "don't let women be in charge of things, and don't let them do as they please whenever they want. Men must have the final say".

And even those tradcon women you mentioned earlier still exist in a society where the laws, courts, and prevailing public opinion encourages them to be unfaithful and makes excuses for when they are. They are fighting an uphill battle against their very instincts to maintain their traditional morals, and there is nothing in society backing those moral up. In the past, both the traditional morals and the society's laws and taboos were understood to be necessary to keep women from raging out of control like a fire.

3
veus_dolt 3 points ago +3 / -0

here's a link to the complaint:

https://aboutblaw.com/YJw

apparently the suicide had an ongoing sexual relationship with her immediate supervisor (paragraph 48 on page 15). aside from the butt plug and lube there seem to be no pertinent details included, so impossible to know what really happened there, save that she almost certainly did not "committed suicide while on a company trip due to a sexual relationship that she had been having with her male supervisor."

9
TheImpossible1 9 points ago +9 / -0

I'm guessing they're lashing out before they all get thrown onto the 7th Call Of Duty Warzone cosmetic item team.

8
TeeBP 8 points ago +8 / -0

Bobby Kotick may be a greedy motherfucker, but he's smart enough to know no one would buy a woke CoD.

6
greenfrogracing 6 points ago +6 / -0

Uhhh remember when CoD Whorezone had the un-skippable BLM social justice loading screen last year? They seem to have bent the knee. Uninstalled and never looked back.
Good riddance!

1
TheImpossible1 1 point ago +2 / -1

You can make your gender female in Cold War so...

5
Tiavor [S] 5 points ago +5 / -0

all we need is a better analysis of the whole thing and what comes from it.

5
TheImpossible1 5 points ago +6 / -1

Supposedly one of them committed suicide.

So that's one in God knows how many years, vs exactly how many were pushed to suicide because of women's propaganda?

I guess it's my turn to do a Jess Phillips and laugh hysterically at my enemy taking themselves out.

5
current_horror 5 points ago +5 / -0

The fact that California is bringing the lawsuit almost certainly points to it being total bullshit. This is the state that made it illegal to not have women on your company board. It's a single-party rogue socialist state. Their courts are the most routinely overruled in the country. They managed to find OJ innocent. Anyone dunking on Blizzard right now is aligning themselves with a much bigger, much more evil entity.

5
Guy_Incognito76 5 points ago +6 / -1

Men existing is now a crime.

2
TheImpossible1 2 points ago +2 / -0

Always has been, but they weren't this obvious about it.