Her dialogue speaks of "privilege" , is blatantly misandric, nearly takes from the suffragettes (Who were not feminists btw) quotes verbatim, horrendously misuses the word "ignorance". Basically she's both a homage and a hilarious parody of feminists. I like it.
I am enjoying Camille for many reasons. Dat accent.
Jon117424 votes
Dominick Destine2 votesInsert gif here.
TyrekGoldenspear8 votesWoah that is a nice Eve gif you got there.
Dominick Destine5 votesWoah that is a nice Eve gif you got there.
Thanks, I got it off of eve-bay.
HalfTangible20 votes[slayer-jinx-unamused]
You're an idiot - And I say that as someone very hostile to modern feminism and SJW culture.
Camille's archetype is what I call the Iron Lady (for lack of a better term coming to mind atm) - she's a "proper woman" in the vein of Victorian England: uptight, upright and always polite. She's aged, yes, but like fine wine; there's a care and perfectionist take and all she does. She's also, however, cruel and bloody; her politeness is not a facade, but it is deceptive. Her will is iron, and she is NOT to be fucked with if you value your life.
She mocks boys because they're male children; it's a common trope for Victorian noblewomen to look down on them (much as it is for Victorian men to look down on little girls for being overemotional). She speaks of privilege in terms of wealth and the power of the nobility, not race.
"Hilarious parody" 'Parody' is when you exaggerate the features of something in order to show its flaws, usually for comedic effect but occasionally for real drama and commentary. One Punch Man, for example, is a parody of Shounen and Superhero stories but also has a dramatic shounen story of its own and comments on what makes a hero.
Camille doesn't parody jack shit anymore than any other character in League and she sure ain't funny, not in a way that a parody would be. (see Kled)
UomoAfide3 votesShe's aged, yes, but like fine wine
Daaaaamn right ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
midnight oil242 votesHehe.... dem legs.
HalfTangible1 votes[slayer-jinx-unamused]
midnight oil242 votesI was joking. Because she has blade legs.
VoidStaresBack1 votesDon't explain the joke...
midnight oil241 votessorry...
VoidStaresBack1 votes[slayer-jinx-wink]
midnight oil241 votesI hope you have a great day. You'll make someone's life better, I know it. This could sound passive-agressive. Sorry about that.
HalfTangible1 votesNot what I meant.
midnight oil241 votesokay. sorry, I've been pretty down lately and have a hard time getting things.
Dominick Destine1 votesYou're an idiot
That's lovely.
"Hilarious parody" 'Parody' is when you exaggerate the features of something in order to show its flaws
Yes, thanks for proving my point.
To say that Camille is not over-the-top would be nonsense, perhaps not Draven levels (Obviously) but still.
Camille doesn't parody jack shit anymore than any other character in League and she sure ain't funny
For starters comedy falls within the purview of subjectivity so your argument is automatically wrong.
That being said, even if it were "unfunny" that still wouldn't disqualify it as a parody.
Thorgram5 votesCamille is not over the top. She is just the perfect representation of what HalfTangible called The Iron Lady.
"Camille's archetype is what I call the Iron Lady (for lack of a better term coming to mind atm) - she's a "proper woman" in the vein of Victorian England: uptight, upright and always polite."
Another thing that show she is not a feminist, is that she never refer to herself only by her gender. She is all about her superiority, as an individual opposed to the superiority as a community.
And yeah she isn't funny. I mean she is really ironical, and she is having fun. Like a cat has fun with a mouse before bluntly killing it.
Dominick Destine1 votesAnother thing that show she is not a feminist....
She's more a (hilarious) parody and homage of feminism.
Perhaps you should read what I wrote?
Thorgram6 votesWell, to be more precise, she is not a feminist, not a parody of a feminist and not an homage of feminism, because not even one of her numerous quotes mention anything related to this ideology.
I did read what you wrote, that's why i'm taking the time to reply :)
And Suffragettes were feminists, and could be said to be the first feminist movement ( they were fighting for wowen's right to vote mainly and against other inequalities )
Dominick Destine1 votesAnd Suffragettes were feminists
No they were not.
They had absolutely nothing in common with femininsts and did not declare themselves feminists. They would be disgusted with the antics of all feminists.
TyrekGoldenspear3 votesActually sufferagettes were feminists. First Wave Feminists.
https://www.progressivewomensleadership.com/a-brief-history-the-three-waves-of-feminism/
Now, Third Wave Feminisim, or as some people like to call it, Feminazism, is the current wave, usually defined by the radical thoughts and agendas of many self porclaimed feminists.
So, long story short, the women that campaiged for sufferage were feminists, but only the first wave. The second wave of feminism was okay as well, but the concept and term as a whole went downhill in the third and current wave.
Dominick Destine1 votesActually sufferagettes were feminists. First Wave Feminists.
Nope.
Show me a single piece of evidence that has a suffragette, during the suffrage movement, calling herself a feminist. You will not be able to find it because they were declared feminist long after their movement ended. Or, if you don't like that fact, show me overlapping goals, tactics and hierarchal structure from the suffragettes compared to feminists.
Once again you cannot because you are blatantly wrong. You will never defeat me with such flimsy arguments.
TyrekGoldenspear3 votesWell of course not.
The term feminist didn't come till third wave feminism.
why would I argue something I know that isn't true?
But you were at first arguing that they had nothing to do with feminists. They do ONLY in the sense that they wanted more women's rights. In fact it is very possible that modern feminists coined the term "first wave feminism" to make their cause seem more righteous.
The second parts of your statement are true. They did not in fact call themselves feminists, and they would find the antics of modern day radicals a little odd. (Womanholes instead of manholes? Really?)
Dominick Destine1 votesWell of course not.
The prosecution rests.
you were at first arguing that they had nothing to do with feminists.
I don't remember ever arguing that but that statement does hold true.
There is no overlap in categorization, tactics, goals and hierarchal structure. There is literally nothing to join the two groups. That's like saying the WWF is the same as Square Enix.... and an intelligent man would be like "What? that's... not even.... what?! that's nonsense" and the unintelligent man would argue "But they're men, and they "ROLE PLAY", eh? EH?!?! SEE? THEY'RE THE SAME" and the intelligent man would be like "You're a [Forbidden word]".
it is very possible that modern feminists coined the term "first wave feminism" to make their cause seem more righteous.
If by "very possible" you mean an absolute certainty, then yes.
We already know that that's exactly what happened.
They did not in fact call themselves feminists
Didn't I already tell you that "The prosecution rests"? you have been defeated, quite thoroughly I might add. When it comes to knowledge and debate; I am a grand master, you cannot defeat me with such flimsy resolve.
TyrekGoldenspear3 votesYou're enjoying yourself too much with this lol.
However there is an overlap in goals: Give women more rights.
However modern day feminists take this waay too far. By modern feminists I am specifically referring to radicals.
Dominick Destine1 votesYou're enjoying yourself too much with this
Yes, yes I am.
there is an overlap in goals: Give women more rights.
That is too broad of scope.
A VERY strong argument can be made that suffragettes were interested in having equal rights whereas feminists want privileges. But my earlier statement stands true, while you have found something very tangentially related, it does not bare relevance, why? because by that logic, communists are the same as syndicate owners, which is the reverse the reality... after all "It's for the good of the worker" in the end.
You can justify opposing philosophies with your argument meaning your argument has no value. Or in more simple terms; The goal you are referring to is too broad of scope and means nothing, pull in a bit closer and it falls apart under scrutiny (Suffrage movement (Specific attainment) vs. (????)).
modern day feminists take this waay too far
That's incorrect.
All feminists have been wrong from the very beginning. I point to Andrea Dworkin, Valerie Solanas, Gloria Steinem and to a slightly lesser extent, Betty Friedan, these are the four architets of feminism and all were blatantly wrong about every single thing they said.
Once again and permanently; The prosecution rests (After obliterating the defense)
TyrekGoldenspear3 votesThat is too broad of scope.
According to who? You?
I'm afraid opinion has no place here, especially coming from you, as you pride yourself on stating facts, not opinion.
It is true that feminists want privileges and suffragettes wanted equality, however I did not say that did I? I said they wanted more rights, and it is common knowledge that when a group is stated as needing more rights they are almost always referring to equalizing them, as they are talking about an "oppressed" group.
But my earlier statement stands true, while you have found something very tangentially related, it does not bare relevance, why? because by that logic, communists are the same as syndicate owners, which is the reverse the reality... after all "It's for the good of the worker" in the end.
I'm afraid the tangential relation in your example is a little too much of a stretch, dear DD.
Communism is founded on the idea that everything is owned by the government who then exercise absolute control over people's lives, in the interest of creating a utopia without classes.
The dictionary defines Syndication as "a group of individuals or organizations combined or making a joint effort to undertake some specific duty or carry out specific transactions or negotiations."
You cannot even say that a syndicate is for the good of a worker because in this collection of privately owned organizations profit is the motivator here, not the worker.
While in my example, both groups want more rights for women, but feminists take it from rights to privilege.
You can justify opposing philosophies with your argument meaning your argument has no value... The goal you are referring to is too broad of scope and means nothing, pull in a bit closer and it falls apart under scrutiny (Suffrage movement (Specific attainment) vs. (????)).
Replace (????) with female privilege, a specific attainment that can be summed up as Women > Men.
This can easier be seen by breaking Suffrage movement to "Give women political rights" and breaking female privilege to "Give women social rights."
Mind you that rights become privilege when one side has more rights than the other.
All feminists have been wrong from the very beginning. I point to Andrea Dworkin, Valerie Solanas, Gloria Steinem and to a slightly lesser extent, Betty Friedan, these are the four architets of feminism and all were blatantly wrong about every single thing they said.
Clearly.
The prosecution rests (After obliterating the defense)
You're breaking your own house. In case you haven't noticed I've been on your side this whole time. You are wasting your time arguing semantics.
TyrekGoldenspear1 votes(moved for clarity)
TyrekGoldenspear3 votes[{quoted}](name=Dominick Destine,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=00010002000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-14T20:06:44.922+0000)
Oh man, I'm salivating at the thought of further obliterating your arguments, especially your ULTRA flimsy understanding of communism but even I must back down from this.
Moderation has been very generous so far , I do not want to tempt their wrath by taking yet another step in a direction that I know for a fact will get me in trouble. Moderation is selective with application of rules and the selective nature of said application relies on whether you are in favor or against leftism/feminism.
This places me in a very dangerous position so I humbly back out of this discussion.
Oh for Pete's sake, what on earth do you think I've been doing? I am literally agreeing with you in stating that feminism is bad and you're arguing that my argument for agreeing with you isn't sound. XD
But whatever, realize that I am socially conservative and that there was no argument in the first place, only a disagreement on semantics.
Captaín Insano2 votes[{quoted}](name=Dominick Destine,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=0001000200000000,timestamp=2016-12-13T16:09:37.961+0000)
She's more a (hilarious) parody and homage of feminism.
Perhaps you should read what I wrote?
She's not a feminist though, shes literally a representation of a an upper class woman, Proper, upright, and always correct, She makes multiple references to class in her dialogue I really dont get where your getting feminist from. Shes an assassin that works in the aristocratic class of Piltover to ensure that the lower levels like the zaunites do not rise up. Thats literally what her entire comic story is about. Read her lore. You might learn a thing or two.
Dominick Destine1 votes[{quoted}](name=The Bush Chicken,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=00010002000000000001,timestamp=2016-12-14T21:09:25.274+0000)
She's not a feminist though
I don't remember making a statement claiming otherwise.
Good strawman argument though, sir.
Captaín Insano2 votes[{quoted}](name=Dominick Destine,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=000100020000000000010000,timestamp=2016-12-14T21:15:00.826+0000)
I don't remember making a statement claiming otherwise.
Good strawman argument though, sir.
The title of the thread you started is literally "I was right about Camille; She's absolutely a feminist orientated/inspired character" When she most obviously not feminist orientated or inspired. and unless you don't know what orientated means. Then that is exactly the claim you made.
And here is the definition by the way.
Orientated: directed towards or interested in something
Dominick Destine1 votes[{quoted}](name=The Bush Chicken,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=0001000200000000000100000000,timestamp=2016-12-14T21:24:01.889+0000)
The title of the thread you started is literally "I was right about Camille; She's absolutely a feminist orientated/inspired character" When she most obviously not feminist orientated or inspired. and unless you don't know what orientated means. Then that is exactly the claim you made. And here is the definition by the way. Orientated: directed towards or interested in something
And none of those things mean that I said "She (Camille) is a feminist". When an intelligent man calls out a horrible mistake another man has made, the correct course of action by the man that got called is to say "Yeah you're right, I was foolish" not double down and pretend like reality is not reality.
Read once again and realize your folly.
Captaín Insano2 votes[{quoted}](name=Dominick Destine,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=00010002000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-14T21:28:18.863+0000)
And none of those things mean that I said "She (Camille) is a feminist". When an intelligent man calls out a horrible mistake another man has made, the correct course of action by the man that got called is to say "Yeah you're right, I was foolish" not double down and pretend like reality is not reality.
Read once again and realize your folly.
There is no folly. You made the accusation and 40+ down votes later you realized you made a mistake and can't own up to it. It happens on boards all the time.
Dominick Destine1 votes[{quoted}](name=The Bush Chicken,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=1oXkyJAq,comment-id=000100020000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-14T21:43:04.920+0000)
There is no folly. You made the accusation
Tripling down on your strawman argument? Such commitment is commendable , to be honest.
and 40+ down votes later
Reality is not a popularity contest.
TyrekGoldenspear4 votesNo, but people understand reality.
The few who don't and insist on their own brand are collectively known as insane. :P
midnight oil245 votesBut... all she does is kill people for her family. The only time she's done something against her family was when her brother betrayed her. She gave up any hope of a normal rich person life, just to support her family with a pair of blade legs.
Chatillon3 votesDon't bother arguing, it's Dominick.
We all know Dominick knows best......
Swarovsko3 votesGet educated, delete this and gtfo of internet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg3umXU_qWc
RookPusher3 votesTIL: Only feminists use the words privilege and ignorance.
Dominick Destine1 votesTIL: Only feminists use the words privilege and ignorance.
TIL: Statistical significance and ideological memetic use are not commonly understood.
RookPusher4 votesOnly a poor craftsman blames their tools. Craft a better argument if you want to be understood.
Dominick Destine1 votesif you want to be understood.
If the argument went over your head, that is not on me.
"Everything can at all times be stated, for it will be understood by those that are able to understand"
RookPusher4 votesThere wasn't an argument, you tried to sneak your political agenda into a poorly veiled commentary on a new champion in a video game. 39 downvotes saw through it. And I'm certainly not believing this new narrative you've spun up that it's somehow this highly intellectual, complex analysis of a social commentary that has - inexplicably - been synthesized into a jungler in league of legends.
and since you like quote so much "Forget about it, Donny, you're out of your element"
Dominick Destine1 votesThere wasn't an argument
Pretending that reality does not exist is not a good argument.
you tried to sneak
Yes. I tried to "sneak" by posting in a public forum.
I tried to "sneak" by confirming what I had already stated in a previous thread, making my thoughts on the issue clear.
I tried to "sneak" by making extremely clear and concise statements.
I'm afraid your argument is complete garbage.
39 downvotes
Reality is not a popularity contest.
Most of the board followers are incredibly leftist/feminist, it is no surprise to me that these people would side against logic and reason.
RookPusher3 votesMost of the board followers are incredibly leftist/feminist, it is no surprise to me that these people would side against logic and reason.
So you're saying logic and reason are on the right side?
Oleandervine2 votesIf you'd bothered to read her lore, Camille is far from feminist. She is the heir and enforcer of her aristocratic household, and her role in Piltover society is to destroy her clan's enemies, engage in espionage on her family's behalf, and keep those without money or power without money or power so they do not infringe on the stability of the nobility.
Colgate Gator2 votesReposts the first reply
agbudar2 votesyou are more LIT then a christmas tree
Captaín Insano2 votesI find it hilarious when people do this. They do something, get proven wrong in any number of ways, then attempt to sound more intelligent then anyone by using words that are not commonly used in public speech or buzz words and think that it makes them superior in any way, shape or form. When in reality it is not difficult by any stretch to go to and online thesaurus or dictionary to look up large multi-syllable words and copy paste them in. It really does make a futile argument that much more detestable. The best part is the counter argument was really not all that aggressive. He just decided to take it personally, now it has grown into a large debate on feminism and this kid thinking that he holds some place in the upper class of debate and argumentative skills. "The Prosecution Rests". Except this is anything but a court room and no legal, state or federal, breaches or anything of nearly that much importance has occurred here. This a boards post. Where opinions, wrong or right, stupid or intelligent, are abundant. This post was just plain wrong, and then defended to think that it was right, with fake and incorrectly assumed intelligence, which makes it stupid. There was no feminist influence on Camille or inspiration of any kind. Quoting her in game lore " Camille is an elegant and elite operative who ensures the Piltover machine and its Zaunite underbelly runs smoothly." "Raised among manners and money, she is the Principal Intelligencer of Clan Ferros, tasked with cutting down her family's darker problems with surgical precision." "With the family's focus set upon Camille as the eldest surviving child, no expense was spared in her education, instilling both her aristocratic attitude and sense of duty at an early age." She is an aristocratic woman that is indeed of the archetype (The Iron Lady). A woman of resolve, intelligence, and precise execution. In fact Riot has stated many times over there own streams that Camille is a woman of precision. And they wanted the people that played Camille to get that feel. Her quotes are not threats they are definitive statements. Her saying "Let me be clear. I will kill you" Is not a threat, but to her a definitive truth. She will kill you, regardless of the circumstances. Today's modern feminists make many empty threats. Camille makes promises. That she knows with the utmost certainty that she can and will keep. That is what Camille is. A proper, lethal, woman. (In accordance to the Victorian Times)
