Teaching New Players

[Kroboats]

Forget all this junk about getting girls to play smash. I have a better question: Does anyone know how to get a hermaphrodite to play smash? There are alarmingly few guides on doing so.

 

[DMG]

Decent first post I guess. 7/10

 

[Fortress]

I'm sorry sir, your fedora and black jacket are showing

But... but I live in Montana. It's cold. I like wearing my tenchcoat when the weather permits it.

 

[Papa+Stone]

I held the door for a choir kid once and he was too shy to say anything so he tipped his fedora to me. People need to learn this is not okay.

 

[trojanpooh]

Forget all this junk about getting girls to play smash. I have a better question: Does anyone know how to get a hermaphrodite to play smash? There are alarmingly few guides on doing so.

Same way you get girls to play. By talking down to them and treating them like a stereotype.

 

[DMG]

I hit up girls all the time






Over AIM







While pretending to also be a girl










I'm known as the "Fedora-less Master of the Female Mind". I wrote a book on Women that was on the #1 Amazon List.

Spoiler

I wrote all the notable 5 star reviews. I also bought all the copies.

 

[Fortress]

I hit up girls all the time






Over AIM







While pretending to also be a girl










I'm known as the "Fedora-less Master of the Female Mind". I wrote a book on Women that was on the #1 Amazon List.

Spoiler

I wrote all the notable 5 star reviews. I also bought all the copies.

Hey! My parents got me that one for my twenty-seventh birthday! I keep it downstairs in their basement next to the Bible I don't own.

 

[XalchemistX]

This is what happens if you don't tech

 

[Paradoxium]

that was probably filmed in brawl, where you are unable to tech tripping

 

[IsmaR]

Forget all this junk about getting girls to play smash. I have a better question: Does anyone know how to get a hermaphrodite to play smash? There are alarmingly few guides on doing so.

Say please.

Ask what their stance on Sheik is.

Lastly don't fool yourself into thinking/being paranoid that you're worth ****ing. We can do so much better.

 

[Papa+Stone]

Get ****ed up smashers

 

[Deleted member]

Except it wasn't something that came from a place of dignity and respect. He was talking from a place of superiority over women. His intention might have been for good, but his ideas and thoughts about women in general were clearly sexist.

to avoid hypocrisy, i've thought about this post for a good half week or so.

in the sense that "sexist" has a functional definition based around division as a result from gender, sure the original post is sexist. however, the negative connotation that goes with what sexism is was definitely not in that original post. the OP understands that men and women respond to different stimuli differently- absolutely true- and then wants to know how to work with it. it's an empathetic response that says "i'm not a woman but i want to understand them with regard to this specific topic". and that is a GOOD THING indicative of respect and consideration for someone else that may think differently about a subject. the original poster made no affront to women as a whole, no damaging generalizations, no assumed explanation, and honestly handled it with more delicacy than was probably needed. it was absolutely written in mind with the emotional respect of another group with a known different thinking pattern.

and frankly, i understand why women don't like competitive super smash bros. the superficial appeal of having cartoon characters in children's video games to beat each other up probably bores them to tears. if it was truly this marvelous thing, our community wouldn't be hard segregated into "males" and "women seeking attention from males". got an exception? yeah, me neither.

i would go so far as to say that my message being offensive to you means that there's a good chance that you're already considered your entire stance from the point of a man focused on logic that favors equality and not from the point of a woman. any real woman would show you up front that she doesn't want to be treated like your guy friends and never did or she'd already be trying to kick your ass at this game and the argument wouldn't exist. saying that the community doesn't promote girls to play makes a lot more sense when you're trying to push a game obviously marketed to to males like call of duty or having a main character bayonetta. in a community this receptive to new players and for a game that has no obvious gender-specific undermining traits, that excuse is straight up weak. we donated 6 figures to breast cancer and we discourage women from entering the group? uh... no. lots of smashers take their women to tournaments and i'm usually the one that ends up talking to them, and whether they play or not has very little to do with how the smashers treat them or because society conditioned them.

that's all i have to say for the content of your post. as for how it was written, i think you should work on some stuff too:

- firstly, i'm not being bullheaded in this particular instance, i considered that i might have been wrong, carefully thought it over, and arrived at the same conclusion. just like labeling whoever a sexist, you've once again labeled me as bullheaded based on your assumption for my reasoning. i have no problem explaining my reasoning to you so that you don't have to use these labels.

- i can also see your reasoning to drop the terms of masculine and feminine because they can be loaded terms, but they convey the idea better than dancing around the subject with equally nebulous adjectives and i don't regret using them because the audience better understands my message. as a point of comparison, i do think that calling me bullheaded is more personal than me labeling a group as masculine or feminine because you are choosing to single me out in that instance. you can make your point without these assumptions in the same way that i can make mine without fairly abstract terms, but i can say i have some reason to use those terms like i did. which is debatable, and thats fine. but i can't see any reasoning that would rationalize labeling another debater or otherwise assigning some negative connotation to that person.

- assigning a comparison to the US presidents is equally misleading here because it suggests that "sticking to your guns" is necessarily a bad thing. even if you ignore that appeal to authority is a basic flawed form of logic right up there with ad hominems and strawman arguments, there are tons of notable exceptions to your suggested philosophy in this particular case, such as winston churchill. i believe it is correct to stick to one's honest and better judgment and to accept wrongdoing when it has arrived, but this time is not it, IMO

- you repeated my stance back to me in an attempt to make my argument appear hypocritical:

Attacking my person with your contrived issues isn't going to change my stance.

but this is also misleading. i did not once attack your person, merely the ideas you have put forth. i have also not been insulting to your person in any way, which is not a courtesy you have extended back to me. based on your message, i do not think you intend to be malicious, but rather that you are inexperienced in handling this type of interaction. thus, i have not been hypocritical with you in any way and your person has not been attacked nor did i assign any hard assumptions (contrived issues) to your person. this type of appeal may work for a less intelligent audience, but i would encourage you to drop this type of behavior, as the more educated and experienced people may call you out on it in the future as i am doing now.

i mostly want you to take these ideas away to become a better debater.

i also appreciate that you have linked the respective sources, but i do take issue with their presentation somewhat. first, i did not assign a "why" factor of causation as to why men and women often behave differently, simply that they do. the .pdf file acknowledges that both genders do behave differently at multiple points, and the article merely references the same .pdf file so it's redundant. if you look at the method from page 7 concerning sex-stereotype activities, you'll notice that the sample population was only college students given a scale that encourages normalized moderation as a rating system based on personal judgment, which were then translated by statistical significance into a dichotomous outcome (yes, sex affects this, or no, it does not). given the methods, i do not believe it possible to have a more biased study since so many of the possible heterogeneous variables have been eliminated. a much better study would be to do a full adult population from 18 to 65, with frequency in terms of hours per week rather than a 1-7 rating scale at the person's discretion, with no enjoyment scale (since frequency can just be indicative of enjoyment to begin with) in a way that rated the outcome as a gradient or some other non-dichotomous result. the publication also comes from strictly universities, which are highly incentivised to publish outcomes that are already socially accepted, or should i rather say that societally disruptive outcomes are highly discouraged. and once again, this is all with regard that the authors acknowledge that the literature review cites several sources that men and women behave differently. TL:DR I don't buy it for very legitimate reasons.

 

[turtletank]

Sexism is bad

Here's something to think about:

Thread has new name, OP apologies for misunderstanding. WE CAN ALL GO HOME NOW.
OR
We have a fruitful discussion about how to introduce new players to smash.

 

[Vashimus]

Why so defensive, Umbreon? Kappa

 

[Deleted member]

Why so defensive, Umbreon? Kappa

haha that's amazing.

i pretty much agree with everyone else that this thread has run its course, at least for its original intent. at this point i wanted to honor mookierah's intellect with my best reply after considering what he put down for a few days, but much more so i want to see how other smashers react to the idea that certain aspects of sexism are okay.

 

[Urielhelix]

I will say when i try to get some one to join playing smash with me a play them with a player im not good at so they see me struggling just as much as them. And then i just make sure they have fun when they play. They having fun means they play more and the more they play the better they get.

 

[Paradoxium]

That was a long discriptive post ya got there umbreon, it kinda reminds me of this

making a reasonable argument does not necessarily require a burden of proof, and in situations with limited information requiring the burden of proof is at best shamelessly unnecessary obstructionism that is guaranteed to stifle actual intellectual development. it doesn't make you look smart without context, it just makes you look like a douche.

We livin doe
#meleegangordontbang