Lol, is this real or a joke?

I mean yeah there are certain things that are more favored to men and more favored to women just based on physicality, but most things don't require such a level of physicality for this difference to be that relevant. Also, from your point about men being more violent onwards, there's still an element of socialization. Even if there's more opportunity in certain places to work in places that are atypical for your gender, you might have been socialized to believe you're better off in a place you "conform" to more. This is actually pretty relevant for gaming, considering that gaming isn't an inherently male thing to do, but has been dominated for years, despite there being chances for women to participate.

Anyone can be in T1 but getting into T1 is hard, even for most male players.

This concept applies to anyone regardless of where they live though. It's not like transgenderism only exists in part of the world. It's just not punished as heavily in the US as in other places.

I agree, but also a little debate never hurt anyone, right?

Yeah, it's true that biology has somewhat influenced gender over time, but I did say gender was ever-changing which is kind of true. Nowadays, there isn't a need for traditional gender roles, and it's more productive for those roles to be integrated. Also, I'm not even a sociology major, I just took one class lol. But most of this stuff is pretty base-level anyway. Also, there are some trends either way like men tend to do/think X, and women tend to do/think Y, but a lot of that is socialized, meaning they developed to think that way.

W for him if they do.

I would, but this is an actual issue on this site, so I feel obligated to at least try to make a good argument.

I've been on here defending transgenderism and now it's too much to respond to, so here's my defense in one thread: (incoming downvotes, allat, and other dismissals)

Some of ya'll on here are confident as shit that there are only two genders, and I'm starting to believe you were never taught the difference between sex and gender.

So here it is:

Sex (as defined by Google):
"either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and most other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions."

Now here the important part is "on the basis of their reproductive functions," because this is only a small part of who we are. I mean whose first response to the question "Who are you?" is to answer with what their genitals are? No, you would respond with characteristics of your personality and important aspects of how you want to be known (most of which I would assume are not physical features).

Gender (as defined by Google): "the male sex or the female sex, especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones, or one of a range of other identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."

I know some of you are going to read the first phrase and run to the comments parading, but the important part here is "...or one of a range of other identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female." But especially the "established ideas of male and female," is the part where people don't seem to understand. See, what our concept of gender is, is made up. What makes something masculine or feminine is completely arbitrary. Like why do usually women wear dresses and men usually don't? Or why are men traditionally perceived as the providers of the family, while women are caregivers? These are just a couple of examples of how gender has been socially constructed.

Now comparing the two, what in the physical description of someone necessarily indicates things about how they should be? Or rather why would someone with XX chromosomes be more likely to wear a dress than someone with a Y chromosome? Without gender there is nothing to interpret what those chromosomes mean. And thus, you end up with two, everchanging notions of what a man and women are. But those are just two ideas of what someone can be, and not everyone falls into either of those categories. And since gender is not necessarily a physical descriptor, but rather a social/cultural descriptor, someone can choose whether to abide by that label, or another label or identify with something completely different.

There is more to go into, but I'll leave it at that. I recognize that this is kind of a lot to take in, and I've been a little confrontational today. This isn't really an attack so much as it's just trying to be informative. I hope this was somewhat helpful. I just wanted to share this considering transgenderism gets brought up a lot on this site.

TLDR: Gender is a social construct and is different than sex. Evidence of this can be found by analyzing the origins of our notion of what a man and a woman are. Thus, there are more than two genders.

Bro say it, no balls. But fr I'm starting to see why people say "if I speak" so much.

Yeah I said I like arguing and debating, but it's so I can improve on my reasoning skills. And yeah, I'm implying that I'm right, and on certain things it's not good to make the claim. But on this particular issue I am right, and I'm going defend that. The main reason why I'm posting so much is because people are going to continue being transphobic without really understanding it fully.

Also, I'm the exact opposite irl lol.

I'm not trying to start anything, but I'll always defend my position if I have too. Plus, people on this site make claims about stuff while being wildly misinformed, and it's harmful to the overall culture.

Holy shit deplatform that liar. Bro just waffles and has nothing of value to add.

Salutations!

Tbh oxy could actually be a good signing though.

Damn yall are so soft, like people legit can't get challenged on any of their beliefs without winning about it, smh.

Actual W igl, hope she gets into t2/t1 one day.

That's my point though, that there's still a lot of cis players to idolize in GC.

Ik some people recognize skuba, but I still feel like he's underrated rn. Definitely franchise worthy, but no team really needs an upgrade at smokes.

Yeah, but trans players make up only small percentage of gc players. There are still cis gc players that could provide some hope for a young player hoping to go pro one day.

Tbh actually a good response, but also if players genuinely fall into any of these categories that's actually sad asf.

mimi is underrated asf like she has insane mechanics. Flor is too young and needs coaching fs, but she could be insane if under the right coaching. meL could just make it off being an igl in a market with few good igls. The rest I'm not too familiar with, but there's always a chance.

Yeah, it sucks, but it's also sadly just how things are for now.

Giants are still gonna be mid, and TL could be good, but probably are gonna be mid too.

I mean they do, but a lot of other GC teams don't. But maybe one day they qualify, they certainly have the potential to do so.

Nah it's probably happened a least a few times. Even if it's not explicitly disclosed, there's decent amount of sexist gamers, which probably extends to pro players somewhat.

Tbh I think he just exaggerated it some, like I'm sure some players are sexist like that, but almost every team having a player like that is crazy.

Because relying on an your current team to qualify just to get a chance is unlikely for almost any player in GC. Basically, they only have one chance a year now, to prove what level they're on, and even then, the whole team has to be good for them to qualify.

The direct quote is some, not a lot, and in terms of igling she probably could contest some high level igls. Mechanically, I'm not too sure because lately she hasn't been doing too well, but historically she's been pretty good. Maybe not quite on the T1 level but then again FNS exists so idk.

Tbh V1 just lose a lot of close games, plus that first game they weren't even playing with their normal roster, nillyaz subbed in for Noia.

They play SR a shit ton and beat them damn near everytime, like SR was bound to win at some point.

There has been only one international tournament in GC, so it's not like there's a bunch of tournaments. As for winning in NA, yeah she's only won in NA, but she's won damn near every tournament here.

Ok, but other teams have good players and they don't win. A team has to be able to utilize it's players well and the igl takes part in that process.

Bro people are straight-up just hating in that thread, but it's VLR so I guess it's not that surprising.

No, it's not because meL has one: played on and won with two different rosters, two: has won much more than twice, and three: has better relative stats (stats against their competition).

Nah it's meL and it's not close. In terms of stats, she's not the best, but she's by far the best GC IGL in any region, and she still puts up decent numbers too.

#31

Yeah, it's true that a GC hasn't been able to qualify for t2, but it doesn't necessarily mean that any of those players aren't good enough to play in t2. To me, it just seems like the talent is so spread out that each team lacks depth.

Basically anyone on V1 aside from alexis, SR flowerful and sonder, COL L4CE, and SR panini (I'm not as familiar with her, but her stats on SR recently look pretty good).

These are just cis-women because ik vlr has a thing about trans-women, and I didn't mention NB in my original comment. Also, these are just players who I feel like could succeed in T2/T1 if given the chance. I could be wrong, and or I could be leaving a lot of players out, idk.

Nah, a decent amount of them are actually pretty good, or at least look that way. I guess we won't really know until they get a chance to prove it, but there is some definite talent there.

And people wonder why there aren't any female players in T1.

Bro I literally replied with the correct tracker, it's V1 meL.

Nah because the mel they're referring to is V1 meL I think.

https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/V1%20meL%23ori/overview?playlist=competitive&season=all

Not a ton better but also meL is an igl, and igls aren't always the best.

https://www.vlr.gg/player/20098/mel

bro lmao you got the wrong mel.

A lot of people saying no in here like she's ever played in T1. Let's be real, a good player on a bad team probably looks worse because the results of the team aren't good. Like let's be fr, put aspas in V1 instead of Flor, and the team is still probably going to struggle against T2 teams. She's consistently putting up good numbers even when her team isn't, regardless of the opposing team. Ya'll are just hating rn.

Just figure out how you want the game to feel. I used to play on high sens but the control was super hard, so I dropped to low/mid-low sens, but it just felt too slow. I think a good approach is to find a sens that makes you feel like you have control but one that feels smooth to aim with.

Overall, I basically shifted my dpi from 800 to 1200, and my sens from .3 to .25. For the record, I now have been using .26 with 1200 dpi - 312 edpi, for a while. Nothing too crazy but it works for me. After you find a sens just play with it and after time you'll get used to it.

I like foxy9 but there's no way you genuinely believe DRX is better with him. DRX does so much better when zest is in instead.

Nah 100% it's:

Raze - zekken
Yoru/Chamber - TenZ
Skye - Sacy
Viper - johnqt
Brim - pancada

Or Sacy and johnqt switch

Tbh it doesn't really matter the state of the game at the time, what SEN did was really impressive. The were just better than everyone else.

Anyone who knows valorant didn't forget. He always has been insane, he's just finally expanding his game to fit what his team needs.