The R Word

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 . . . 20 NEXT
 

Shjade:

Right, except that you noted the reason you care about that right to express yourself is that it's how you have fun; if you couldn't express yourself, you wouldn't have as much fun. That is an appeal to emotion.

Its not appeal to emotion when I said that the issue was about censorship and not having fun.

Shjade:
Emotional harm can be as damaging as physical harm.

I disagree.

Shjade:
Your argument doesn't really even apply given that freedom of expression doesn't cover instances that potentially cause harm to others (see also: hate speech, shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.).

Again using examples that don't apply. I'm not saying hate speech or saying something with the intent to physically harm someone.

Shjade:
You seem to think you are in a position in which you need to be convinced you shouldn't be allowed to be a detriment to other people. In reality, the burden here is on you to prove that you should.

No, if your going to try to dictate what I can and can't do, your going to be burden with telling me why I should care what you think.

Danzavare:

It's really not that scary, I promise.

That's great, I still don't find it appealing.

Creatural:
What are you even saying?

That I shouldn't be held accountable for the inconceivable possibility that someone might freaking out over an expression I use. Not that confusing.

MatsVS:

Helmholtz Watson:

MatsVS:
One thing has been made abundantly clear in this thread: Unexamined privilege is a poison that rots the soul.

You still haven't told me why privilege is a bad thing, but thanks for the silly comment.

Because your privilege lends you the assumption that you having fun at the expense of everyone around you is a-ok. The rest of us just wants video games to be a place for EVERYONE, you want it to be a place for YOU. You are a hindrance and you can't even see it. Privilege.

No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

lacktheknack:

manaman:

lacktheknack:
You know, the current crop of comments is making a forced utopia or 1984 scenario look preeeetty dang good.

OT: That was an excellent article, Anonymous. People often ignore that words are not just words.

I will happily put up with a thousand idiots abusing their rights so that I myself may still have them.

I will do so as well, but most certainly not happily.

Well yeah. I mean I was stretching it a bit to better get my point across. Yeah, I do get pretty annoyed at times, but overall it's a good thing.

It's the whole freedom versus security argument. You have to sacrifice freedoms for increased security. At what point do you say no more?

manaman:

lacktheknack:

manaman:

I will happily put up with a thousand idiots abusing their rights so that I myself may still have them.

I will do so as well, but most certainly not happily.

Well yeah. I mean I was stretching it a bit to better get my point across. Yeah, I do get pretty annoyed at times, but overall it's a good thing.

It's the whole freedom versus security argument. You have to sacrifice freedoms for increased security. At what point do you say no more?

I know, and I agree. Although, based on this thread, if I was suddenly offered a no-free-speech utopia, I'd be scarily tempted.

Amazing article.

I had an experience with many victims of rape and it certainly wasn't pleasent. I'm fortunate enough of not being a victim myself and God helps me of not becoming one myself, but it was heart breaking enough to hear their stories, that I started to imagine how horrifying it is and I think that's the closest thing I'll ever have of being a victim of rape myself.

I'm guilty of using the word with my friends in the past, heck, we even joked about "being raped" and we even mimicked the action of raping each other. I never used the word in any online game, ever.

I'm actively avoiding using that word with my friends ever again, no matter how drunk I may get with them.

Helmholtz Watson:

Shjade:

Right, except that you noted the reason you care about that right to express yourself is that it's how you have fun; if you couldn't express yourself, you wouldn't have as much fun. That is an appeal to emotion.

Its not appeal to emotion when I said that the issue was about censorship and not having fun.

Shjade:
Emotional harm can be as damaging as physical harm.

I disagree.

Shjade:
Your argument doesn't really even apply given that freedom of expression doesn't cover instances that potentially cause harm to others (see also: hate speech, shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.).

Again using examples that don't apply. I'm not saying hate speech or saying something with the intent to physically harm someone.

Shjade:
You seem to think you are in a position in which you need to be convinced you shouldn't be allowed to be a detriment to other people. In reality, the burden here is on you to prove that you should.

No, if your going to try to dictate what I can and can't do, your going to be burden with telling me why I should care what you think.

Danzavare:

It's really not that scary, I promise.

That's great, I still don't find it appealing.

Creatural:
What are you even saying?

That I shouldn't be held accountable for the inconceivable possibility that someone might freaking out over an expression I use. Not that confusing.

MatsVS:

Helmholtz Watson:
You still haven't told me why privilege is a bad thing, but thanks for the silly comment.

Because your privilege lends you the assumption that you having fun at the expense of everyone around you is a-ok. The rest of us just wants video games to be a place for EVERYONE, you want it to be a place for YOU. You are a hindrance and you can't even see it. Privilege.

No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

My what are you even saying wasn't to be taken literally. It was more of a reaction to you being dishonest enough to try and say that you had proved something to me when you've done nothing of the like. And continue to do nothing of the like I might add.

And it's not freaking out, it's not becoming offended, it's being triggered. It's different from everything else and that's why we use a different word for it.

Also, it's not inconceivable, again you have part of this article as documentation of that fact and plenty of places you could be looking for that information. You could also actually read what we've said and realize that it's not inconceivable with that body of information provided to you as well.

Helmholtz Watson:
No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

I think some people consider anything they dislike to actually be objectively bad and therefore demand its removal, as if doing so is logical and true. They come at things from the perspective wherein their opinion is correct or "the most correct," rather than seeing issues of conflicting opinions as matters of taste and bias, where nothing is more or less correct and where what an individual feels carries no weight.

We all do it from time to time. Some more than others.

xaszatm:

Okay...I understand that you have the RIGHT to say what you want. That is perfectly fine. What I don't understand is WHY you would WANT to say it. I...I literally cannot comprehend any reasoning behind such callous insulting, especially to other people you do not know.

I guess after saying that I'm "starving" when I really mean that I haven't eaten in a few hours or saying that a test is "killing" me when I really mean that I find a test difficult, I just think that "rape" is just a word like "starving" or "killing". As such, it isn't something to get worked up over.

xaszatm:
Maybe I'm too optimistic but I always thought that such words were to be ashamed of, not lauded. I don't think you would just casually say such people to random people off the street, so why do you feel the need to say it over a game? What possible benefit could you gain by doing this? I literally do not know. Please explain. I cannot understand such a lack of empathy or such a desire to insult people you do not know...

Just a form of expression I guess. Also when I was in highschool, the term was used very often when a person did well on a test.

Taunta:

It's not about your right to express yourself. Your right to express yourself ends when you're infringing on someone else's rights to not be grievously emotionally harmed.

Eggshells that I don't have to walk on.

Taunta:
Perhaps you should examine why your enjoyment of a game is so closely entwined with the usage of the word "rape" and other hurtful language.

I have and people are making a big thing out of nothing.

Taunta:
It's not "censorship" it's "Basic Social Skills". Typically people who are not social clods don't go around spouting inflammatory jokes and phrases in public because they don't know you like that. If you want to reserve your right to joke about rape then that's fine, but you should keep it around people you know, like how people like to keep other inflammatory statements around their friends, because you as a group have decided that you're okay with discussing it.

I go back to what I have typed previously, I have a right to say it and people have a right to tell me off and mute me.

Taunta:
Running your mouth in public is not a good practice, and it's gotten a lot of real life people in trouble, even lost their jobs.

I'm not some silly celebrity on twitter, nor do I live in the UK. Thanks for the concern though.

Taunta:

I never thought I'd have to explain "Why you can't say certain things in public".

If you want me to follow your rules when I don't have to then you better explain yourself.

Creatural:

And it's not freaking out, it's not becoming offended, it's being triggered.

Your arguing over semantics now.

Creatural:
Also, it's not inconceivable, again you have part of this article as documentation of that fact and plenty of places you could be looking for that information. You could also actually read what we've said and realize that it's not inconceivable with that body of information provided to you as well.

Seeing as not everybody is going to read this, it is inconceivable.

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:
No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

I think some people consider anything they dislike to actually be objectively bad and therefore demand its removal, as if doing so is logical and true. They come at things from the perspective wherein their opinion is correct or "the most correct," rather than seeing issues of conflicting opinions as matters of taste and bias, where nothing is more or less correct and where what an individual feels carries no weight.

We all do it from time to time. Some more than others.

...um ok? Just making an observation I take it?

Helmholtz Watson:

Creatural:

And it's not freaking out, it's not becoming offended, it's being triggered.

Your arguing over semantics now.

Creatural:
Also, it's not inconceivable, again you have part of this article as documentation of that fact and plenty of places you could be looking for that information. You could also actually read what we've said and realize that it's not inconceivable with that body of information provided to you as well.

Seeing as not everybody is going to read this, it is inconceivable.

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:
No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

I think some people consider anything they dislike to actually be objectively bad and therefore demand its removal, as if doing so is logical and true. They come at things from the perspective wherein their opinion is correct or "the most correct," rather than seeing issues of conflicting opinions as matters of taste and bias, where nothing is more or less correct and where what an individual feels carries no weight.

We all do it from time to time. Some more than others.

...um ok? Just making an observation I take it?

Yea, sorry, lol. Was kind of adding to what you were talking about.

Carry on!

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:

Creatural:

And it's not freaking out, it's not becoming offended, it's being triggered.

Your arguing over semantics now.

Creatural:
Also, it's not inconceivable, again you have part of this article as documentation of that fact and plenty of places you could be looking for that information. You could also actually read what we've said and realize that it's not inconceivable with that body of information provided to you as well.

Seeing as not everybody is going to read this, it is inconceivable.

Clearing the Eye:

I think some people consider anything they dislike to actually be objectively bad and therefore demand its removal, as if doing so is logical and true. They come at things from the perspective wherein their opinion is correct or "the most correct," rather than seeing issues of conflicting opinions as matters of taste and bias, where nothing is more or less correct and where what an individual feels carries no weight.

We all do it from time to time. Some more than others.

...um ok? Just making an observation I take it?

Yea, sorry, lol. Was kind of adding to what you were talking about.

Carry on!

lol, ok I will. FYI, you made some good points though

Helmholtz Watson:

Creatural:

And it's not freaking out, it's not becoming offended, it's being triggered.

Your arguing over semantics now.

Creatural:
Also, it's not inconceivable, again you have part of this article as documentation of that fact and plenty of places you could be looking for that information. You could also actually read what we've said and realize that it's not inconceivable with that body of information provided to you as well.

Seeing as not everybody is going to read this, it is inconceivable.

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:
No, I think it is a place where you and I can express ourselves freely. I have the right to say that I "raped" the last match and you have the right to tell me off and mute me for using the term rape in such a manner.

I think some people consider anything they dislike to actually be objectively bad and therefore demand its removal, as if doing so is logical and true. They come at things from the perspective wherein their opinion is correct or "the most correct," rather than seeing issues of conflicting opinions as matters of taste and bias, where nothing is more or less correct and where what an individual feels carries no weight.

We all do it from time to time. Some more than others.

...um ok? Just making an observation I take it?

Yeah, I am just mentioning how you should be using words, is there something wrong with that? Was I arguing over something else in the last part of this? All I saw was me explaining that something wasn't meant to be taken literally as you took it, which I think is understandable to explain, and then me talking to you about words because it's a little weird that you're using them incorrectly when they've been used as they have for a reason. The word trigger is important to this stuff and I don't want you to think it's like other words you've been using alongside it or spread any ignorance about how important it actually is.

I don't see why you'd suddenly think it's unimportant to talk about words when we're talking about how damaging one word can be.

And your second inconceivable comment didn't make sense unless you meant as a joke which didn't come off too well honestly.

dragonswarrior:

Therumancer:
Epic Snips

So... You do realize that you're lumping good feminists in with a bunch of stupid people right?

I mean, I'll grant you that I don't know everyone. I only know a very few people, and I only listen to fewer. But the people I know who are feminists don't have these crappy "Double standards" that you keep talking about.

Because those double standards are stupid. And if a feminist says it's okay for a woman to be raped in a book with fabio on the cover then he or she isn't a real feminist.

He or she is an idiot.

Like it or not feminism today is exactly what I've mentioned. The battle for equality has already been won, now like most civil rights movements that are past their prime it's become about power. Modern feminism is about advantage, masquerading as a demand for a kind of equality that already exists.

Also do not misunderstand the point, the bit about the romance novels isn't so much about feminism, but the human condition. Having an attractive member of the gender your interested in force themselves on you is a common fantasy. Guys have their dominatrix stuff, women have their own versions. The operative term for a positive rape in fantasy is generally "ravished" to make a distinction, but the fundemental act is still the same. The point here being that in fantasy rape is not entirely a bad thing, as long as it's understood to be fantasy. The general distinction is whether the characters involved wind up enjoying themselves. See, in a book with Fabio on the cover the lady being used as a pirate's concubine, or being enslaved in Antonio Banderas' harem (he apparently did a lot of those covers and inspirational artwork early on in his career from some things I've read) the "victim" ultimatly enjoys their plight on some level, and really I have no real issue with that kind of thing. It's important to understand that it's fantasy though, and not confusing it with reality and what rare actually is, is why it requires an adult audience to be able to seperate those things.

The point about feminism is that the arguements are increasingly that women can handle that kind of thing, but men cannot. Your liable to see feminist crusades against garbage in that genere produced for a male audience, or where men dominate women who fall in love with their dominators, but you do not generally see it against the material produced for women. You generally do not see crusades by women against romance novels, yet you will see them against material covering the same grounds produced for a male audience. The idea being that men can't handle such things or should be prohibited from it selectively.

Anonymous:

Therumancer:
Your taking a shotgun to the subject in hopes of hitting something. I'll start out in being blunt in saying (as I've said before) that I myself was raped by a gay man when I was six. In my cause though I blocked it out, which doesn't make it any easier when you know it happened.

I disagree with what you have said in the rest of your post regarding feminism, but I'm very sorry about what happened to you. It's a very difficult thing to live with and even more difficult to talk about, and I respect you for being able to speak about it.

I would encourage you to talk to someone about it -- a professional, a family member, someone in the clergy, or even a friend. Believe me, talking about it helps a lot. Turning your back on it and hoping you won't remember doesn't work and often makes things worse. That was definitely the case with me.

Already dealt with, indeed having spoken to people about nightmares and such is one of the big reasons why I know it happened and obtained a lot of the details I have.

My point is simply to say that I empathize with the victims, and have a degree of understanding on the subject from their perspective, while not agreeing with a lot of the political positions and statements being made.

Creatural:

Yeah, I am just mentioning how you should be using words, is there something wrong with that?

Only when you cross the line from informing me, to telling me how to behave.

Creatural:

And your second inconceivable comment didn't make sense unless you meant as a joke which didn't come off too well honestly.

Its not a joke, not everybody will see this article. Hence its inconceivable for a person to know about how others will react.

zefiris:
Ah, every discussion about "be a decent person" obviously has people like Helmholtz Watson, you who came into the discussion shrieking about "censorship" and are extremely angry that people judge you for your crappy behavior.

Wrong, I came into this discussion stating that people are making a big thing out of nothing over the use of the word "rape".

zefiris:

It's not censorship to ask you to behave like a decent human being.

Your right, but it is censorship when you don't just ask, but start telling me how I should behave

zefiris:

Communities still can and will. That's not censorship. That's telling you to be a decent human being for a change.[/qoute] They can try to dictate my behavior on other medias, but I don't have to comply.

zefiris:

[quote]
I have and people are making a big thing out of nothing.

You are, yes, I agree entirely, you are blowing this completely out of proportion by dragging "censorship" and "free speech" into it without understand what you are even talking about.

Stop crying emo tears about being asked to behave like a decent person.

Cute, taking things out of context is fun, huh?

Helmholtz Watson:

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:
Your arguing over semantics now.

Seeing as not everybody is going to read this, it is inconceivable. ...um ok? Just making an observation I take it?

Yea, sorry, lol. Was kind of adding to what you were talking about.

Carry on!

lol, ok I will. FYI, you made some good points though

Why thank you.

I argue against the use of certain words from time to time. Like the other day, someone used faggot to describe a party they disliked. As if being a "faggot" was something worthy of insult. I commented and more or less told them not to use the word in such a manor in future, should they want people to care what you have to say, reminding him how offensive the phrase can be to others. I actively tried to "prove" they were wrong in using the word.

A few people agreed with me and a few bashed me, calling me overly sensitive. Long story short, I think we all let our bias override our logic sometimes. While calling someone out and/or ignoring them is perhaps the best option, it can be hard not to forget just what opinions are and how little personal taste weighs when it comes to any form of true right and wrong, and to argue from a position you personally consider to be the high ground.

It's all well and good for some people here to demand others discontinue the use of rape to describe a crushing victory. To a certain degree I can empathize--after all, what harm is there in someone not using a word that upsets some people? But at the end of the day, I must remember: we're all equal and no one has to stop doing something they want because another doesn't want to hear it. Why should person A change their language to suit person B? Or C, D, E, F and G?

If we argue against things we dislike, purely because we dislike them, we don't have a leg to stand on. After all, no one is more or less important than anyone else in a free country.

Clearing the Eye:
Hot damn, there is a lot of talk about feminism and what is and isn't feminist lately.

My empathy for the cause has shrunk considerably.

EDIT: derp, wrong word -_-

That has what to do with this article?

John Funk:

Clearing the Eye:
Hot damn, there is a lot of talk about feminism and what is and isn't feminist lately.

My empathy for the cause has shrunk considerably.

EDIT: derp, wrong word -_-

That has what to do with this article?

Pardon? What doesn't my opinion have to do with the article would perhaps be a more answerable question.

Clearing the Eye:

Helmholtz Watson:

Clearing the Eye:
Yea, sorry, lol. Was kind of adding to what you were talking about.

Carry on!

lol, ok I will. FYI, you made some good points though

Why thank you.

I argue against the use of certain words from time to time. Like the other day, someone used faggot to describe a party they disliked. As if being a "faggot" was something worthy of insult. I commented and more or less told them not to use the word in such a manor in future, should they want people to care what you have to say, reminding him how offensive the phrase can be to others. I actively tried to "prove" they were wrong in using the word.

A few people agreed with me and a few bashed me, calling me overly sensitive. Long story short, I think we all let our bias override our logic sometimes. While calling someone out and/or ignoring them is perhaps the best option, it can be hard not to forget just what opinions are and how little personal taste weighs when it comes to any form of true right and wrong, and to argue from a position you personally consider to be the high ground.

It's all well and good for some people here to demand others discontinue the use of rape to describe a crushing victory. To a certain degree I can empathize--after all, what harm is there in someone not using a word that upsets some people? But at the end of the day, I must remember: we're all equal and no one has to stop doing something they want because another doesn't want to hear it. Why should person A change their language to suit person B? Or C, D, E, F and G?

If we argue against things we dislike, purely because we dislike them, we don't have a leg to stand on. After all, no one is more or less important than anyone else in a free country.

^^^^^This right here^^^^^ ladies and gentlemen is something that everybody should look at! Truer words have not been said in this thread.

Helmholtz Watson:

Creatural:

Yeah, I am just mentioning how you should be using words, is there something wrong with that?

Only when you cross the line from informing me, to telling me how to behave.

Creatural:

And your second inconceivable comment didn't make sense unless you meant as a joke which didn't come off too well honestly.

Its not a joke, not everybody will see this article. Hence its inconceivable for a person to know about how others will react.

zefiris:
Ah, every discussion about "be a decent person" obviously has people like Helmholtz Watson, you who came into the discussion shrieking about "censorship" and are extremely angry that people judge you for your crappy behavior.

Wrong, I came into this discussion stating that people are making a big thing out of nothing over the use of the word "rape".

zefiris:

It's not censorship to ask you to behave like a decent human being.

Your right, but it is censorship when you don't just ask, but start telling me how I should behave

zefiris:

Communities still can and will. That's not censorship. That's telling you to be a decent human being for a change.[/qoute] They can try to dictate my behavior on other medias, but I don't have to comply.

zefiris:

[quote]
I have and people are making a big thing out of nothing.

You are, yes, I agree entirely, you are blowing this completely out of proportion by dragging "censorship" and "free speech" into it without understand what you are even talking about.

Stop crying emo tears about being asked to behave like a decent person.

Cute, taking things out of context is fun, huh?

No, it still doesn't make sense to say inconceivable in that context. The inconceivable of yours that I originally addressed was saying that it's inconceivable for someone to be hurt by the mention of rape. This article is proof that someone can be hurt by a mention of rape. That inconceivable isn't an addressal of something else.

And should in this case isn't a grounded thing set in stone, it's a mention of how words should be used, like if you want to draw something you should actually draw on something. Should doesn't always literally mean YOU WILL DO AS I WILL YOU TO or anything so dramatic as that. It can indicate a desirable state, a hope for something. I'm not commanding you to behave in a certain way when I say should.

Helmholtz Watson:

xaszatm:

Okay...I understand that you have the RIGHT to say what you want. That is perfectly fine. What I don't understand is WHY you would WANT to say it. I...I literally cannot comprehend any reasoning behind such callous insulting, especially to other people you do not know.

I guess after saying that I'm "starving" when I really mean that I haven't eaten in a few hours or saying that a test is "killing" me when I really mean that I find a test difficult, I just think that "rape" is just a word like "starving" or "killing". As such, it isn't something to get worked up over.

xaszatm:
Maybe I'm too optimistic but I always thought that such words were to be ashamed of, not lauded. I don't think you would just casually say such people to random people off the street, so why do you feel the need to say it over a game? What possible benefit could you gain by doing this? I literally do not know. Please explain. I cannot understand such a lack of empathy or such a desire to insult people you do not know...

Just a form of expression I guess. Also when I was in highschool, the term was used very often when a person did well on a test.

Okay...I'm sorry if I sound really naive for a pre-med student (too late), but in what environment would the word "rape" be used so casually. Clearly you and I have different meanings of the word, but it baffles me that there ARE different meaning of the word that are COMPLETELY different from its standard definition.

Again, I am not saying you do not have the right to say it. I am just confused. Hurrah for living under a rock...

EDIT: Also, "starving" = "rape"? ...Really?

Clearing the Eye:

John Funk:

Clearing the Eye:
Hot damn, there is a lot of talk about feminism and what is and isn't feminist lately.

My empathy for the cause has shrunk considerably.

EDIT: derp, wrong word -_-

That has what to do with this article?

Pardon? What doesn't my opinion have to do with the article would perhaps be a more answerable question.

I was referring to feminism. This article was explicitly not feminist, unless you consider the radical idea that we should be mindful to not further hurt people who have been through an unspeakable act all that feminist.

Creatural:

I'm not commanding you to behave in a certain way when I say should.

Great, then you and I don't have an issue. As long as your not trying to dictate my behavior, you and I have no problem.

xaszatm:

Okay...I'm sorry if I sound really naive for a pre-med student (too late), but in what environment would the word "rape" be used so casually. Clearly you and I have different meanings of the word, but it baffles me that there ARE different meaning of the word that are COMPLETELY different from its standard definition.

The word could be used to emphasis that you just did really well on a test("I just raped that test") or that you did really well in a multiplayer game("I just raped that last match in COD")

xaszatm:

EDIT: Also, "starving" = "rape"? ...Really?

Again, I'm just demonstrating how some words are already used and nobody seems to care, yet the word rape is supposed to be treated special.

Probably the most powerful and important article I've ever read on this site. We applaud you for your courage in bringing back those memories to help others understand.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: You, sir, are a Top Man.

John Funk:

Clearing the Eye:

John Funk:

That has what to do with this article?

Pardon? What doesn't my opinion have to do with the article would perhaps be a more answerable question.

I was referring to feminism. This article was explicitly not feminist, unless you consider the radical idea that we should be mindful to not further hurt people who have been through an unspeakable act all that feminist.

You seem to be coming at this from a rather knee-jerk way without much thought as to what exactly either you or I have said. The article and yourself both go out of their way's to state that this topic isn't feminist. The former spends some time explaining why and the latter, you, said it quite clearly--"This article was explicitly not feminist." I commented that "Hot damn, there is a lot of talk about feminism and what is and isn't feminist lately." Adding that the rather large amount of voice time the issue has received has numbed me to it and increased my apathy.

How you managed to twist my words in your mind to mean anything other than what was said, I do not know.

I find it really strange how rape tends to characterized as a bigger evil than murder or even torture. For example jim seems to think Hannibal-esque torture can be cool while rape can never be cool. It's just bizarre. I'm not arguing that rape could be cool or what ever, but how on earth can murder and torture be cool while rape not being cool. Is it because many of the poster on these forums are so far removed from the prospect of murder & torture that they can can't quite relate to it, where as rape is far more pervasive in the developed world?

double post

dantoddd:
I find it really strange how rape tends to characterized as a bigger evil than murder or even torture. For example jim seems to think Hannibal-esque torture can be cool while rape can never be cool. It's just bizarre. I'm not arguing that rape could be cool or what ever, but how on earth can murder and torture be cool while rape not being cool. Is it because many of the poster on these forums are so far removed from the prospect of murder & torture that they can can't quite relate to it, where as rape is far more pervasive in the developed world?

Because in this culture, sex is a much larger taboo than violence.

flatten_the_skyline:

Therumancer:

Feminism sucks because it by and large represents a dual standard, and the arguement that girls should be able to do things that get guys branded freaks or wierdos.

I wished some people could have good long discussions with feminists that don't escalate into a fight.

Feminism is such a complex thing and it's easy to just take some example and say that's all there is to it.

And sure, there's people who give feminism a bad reputation (SCUM Manifesto anyone?)

But mostly, what most feminists I speak with want is consent and equality. Both are much less common than you might think.

Consent:
Actually, every sexual interaction is supposed to be consensual. Talk someone who clearly doesn't want to into having sex - not consenual. Touch someone who doesn't want to be touched, even if it's your partner - the same. Flirt aggressively with someone who is not interested in you - get lost. Some people demand that oral consent should be given before every sexual interaction, even in a relationship - and while this might sound a little harsh, in some situations your perception of events just isn't right. As long as there is consent, everything goes - and it is not a contradiction to be a feminist female that is sexually submissive - just because someone sometimes wants to be dominated doesn't mean that it's a weak person. Same with rape fantasies: Yes they exist, but just because you want to live them out in a safe setting doesn't turn you free for all.

Feminists often speak of "rape culture", and I am afraid that that is not exaggerated. One in four women suffers rape or attempted rape at least once in their lives, (women are, in the US, 91% of the victims) many of them get raped by "friends", partners or family members.
And don't give me that "she said it was rape because she cheated" argument to say that people shouldn't be punished for rape. An FBI study claims that 3% of rape accusations are false.
I know a few victims, I have been drugged and sexually abused myself (as a male, though my case wasn't that extreme), and I guess there are many others that just wouldn't tell me about it. About 60% of rape cases never get reported to the police. Of all the cases I know, none was. I just couldn't. The only thing I know that ever happened in all those cases was that one of the rapists was later severely beaten by a boyfriend. No one believed the raped person, they told her to be glad if that guy favoured her.

Equality:
I'm not going into this "women are paid less" thing, which still is an issue, but I want to go into another direction. It is the perception that isn't equal. A great example is that there is no real word for a male slut. There is actually no way a woman can be without being judged. If she's sexually active, she's a slut, if she isn't, she's prude. If a woman dresses sexy, men in her vicinity will think that she wants their response, or that that entitles them to anything.

In reality every sexual interaction is supposed to be consentual, however people, and I'd even venture most people, have fantasies about non-consentual sex with whatever kind of person they are interested in. Guys have their dominatrixs and amazons, girls have their randy shieks, pirate captains, and cattle barons and such. This stuff is sold by the truckload. It's adult material because it takes an adult to be able to seperate the fantasy from the reality and understand that things don't work like that in reality.

I say it's a gray area, not because of some kind of creepy rape fixation, but because it simply is. It's just that in rape fantasy, the people involved all wind up enjoying themselves (eventually) and the terms used are things like "ravished" as opposed to "raped" even though the end result is the same. Some romance novel written for women about some shiek or whatever (represented artistically by models like Fabio, or early Antonio Banderas) capturing some young, pretty thing, and using her for sex while she's taken to all these exotic places, perhaps with some trivial plot thrown in. The differance here is that while the sex isn't consentual to start, it's something everyone involved winds up enjoying, and usually turns into love, that harem girl usually winds up becoming the queen (or at least a favored mistress with a lot of power) by the end of the story for example. That's NOT a blueprint for a healthy real life relationship, which is exactly why it comes with an adult's only label as much as the actual sexual acts themselves.

A line between that kind of thing, or the male version with guys being used by Amazons (or whatever) much the same way, and things like "Rapelay" which is the current textbook whipping boy does exist. That line is that "Rapelay" is all about revenge and the entire point is that the girls on the receiving end don't enjoy it, as the protaganist rapes his way up the line of a family, which puts it in a differant territory as none of the victims wind up genuinely enjoying themselves in any lasting fashion. Other examples like "Battle Raper" are less ambigious, because if that's the series I'm thinking of, I'm not a fan (due it it kind of blowing chips) but if I remember the plotline is basically a fighting tournament where the winners get to use the losers sexually in addition to advancing. Despite "rape" in the title, pretty much everyone involved knows the rules and more or less consented to it by entering into those battles to begin with. It's not exactly a deep title or a common sense set up, but you really can't say it's paticularly offensive either.

A good part of why I am going after feminists is the dual standard. If you take a story about a Shiek who takes women as concubines, who finds that one special girl who he falls in love with while using her, finds the feeligns are mutual with, and eventually marries, along with whatever else pads the story out, if it's direct at men feminists will scream it's a horrible work of rape-horror that needs to be banned. The same basic story appears with someone like "Fabio" on the cover and marketing directed at women, and feminists will generally ignore it.

It should also be noted (to answer this for all those who raised this question) that while feminism was at one time about equality, it's not entirely about power coming at the expense of men, which is why it has a dual standard. The basic message inherant in going after one face of things but not the other is simply that men can't handle it, so society should keep us in line. To be honest, decades ago Feminism had a valid point where women were outright prohibited from voting, or doing specific things for no paticularly good reason. Today, without those valid crusades, it's all about things like trying to basically shackle men because of our physical differances and how they give us an unfair advantage. Demands that standards be lowered for pretigious jobs with physical requirements so women can do them, or even in some cases have job performance standards lowered or removed when certain biological things like childbirth come up. The demand that people overlook the differances between men and women entirely, and oftentimes in exclusion of common sense. Along with this you have feminists in many cases going so far as to claim that due to men being bigger, stronger, and still in control of most of society, there is no such thing as consentual sex and all women are rape victims because they are not in a position of enough control to begin with in order to consent. That is how utterly bonkers the feminist definition of what constitutes rape increasingly is. No matter how consentual it is, it's still rape, since it can't be any
other way. A no-win scenario created by their own inherant logic.

In short, I don't take feminism seriously as a position.

Criticisms of feminism aside though, my basic attitude on the subject of the media is more or less to leave it alone. If people being "ravished" isn't your cup of tea, then chances are you probably shouldn't be buying a book/game/movie/etc... with an AO/X/M/R or whatever rating on it, especially seeing as this kind of thing is usually straightforward about the plotline, and oftentimes outright includes something like a disclaimer about BDSM content or whatever. Both genders are into this, and have their own stuff, as well as a lot of material created for a general audience of both genders being in existance.

When it comes to outright predatory sex, with no enjoyment at all on the part of the victim in any real sense, that can be something differant. Something like "Rapelay" which by all accounts is nothing like the kinds of story I mention are an example of this, since it's all about a protaganist who is out to make women suffer for his own amusement and some thinly veiled desire for a revenge, which isn't even justified.

Even to the above, I will include an exception of sorts due to the horror genere, where unlike Rapelay your not supposed to really empatize with the person/thing doing the raping. In such cases the whole idea of erotic horror is for it to be horrifying, the idea being to create hybrid scenes that arouse and repel at the same time. That's a very specific kind of writing though, and it's aimed at a fringe audience. Like most kinds of horror a lot of people who aren't horror fans just don't really "get it", or the thrill of the grotesque. I tend to put most tentecle rape anime in this catagory. As odd as it will sound I think half the problem with the whole Japanese tentecles thing is that they lack the context of the works that made it popular, leading to a lot of schlock. A lot of people tend to forget that things like "Urotsukidoji" (Overfiend) which is perhaps the defining work of tghe genere, had a lot more going on, and a story sufficient to generated numerous spin offs. Most people have just heard of it, and don't really get the whole context of why you had all those demons and tentecles doing their thing, or that it was supposed to be horrifying and grotesque as opposed to a straightforward turn on. I'm one of the few people who seems to have actually watched those, and who will say that we pretty much need more erotic horror sort of like that as opposed to the garbage the genere produces. Of course then again I'm something of a Cthulhu mythos fan, and really "Overfiend" seemed very Lovecraftian to me, albiet spelling out things that were only implied (or never fully described) in a lot of the stories. It also features some protaganists (well for parts of it) who were in a bit more of a position to try and do something meaningful than your typical lovecraftian protaganist or CoC investigator team. People tend to forget that for all the sex, Overfiend also had some really wicked fight scenes involing superhumans doing things like spinning and hurling helicopter blades at lovecraftian demon sorcerors... Everyone remembers tne tentecles, but forgets some of Amano Jaku's fight scenes.... but ah well, I'm rambling.

you poor thing, i want to give you a big hug /hugs, i have also bin the victim of sexual assault, but did not get my bones broken.

I am going to go out on a limb here, and state my opinion on this. It maybe a bit controversial to some, and a few might even find it hurtful. This is my view on things. I am not a rape victim, I cannot relate to this, therefore I will not say "I know how it feels, bro.".
On that note: I have the outmost respect for any rape victim and I wish them the best with coping after such a harmful event. Your situation, is one that I do not wish to be in and no one should have to experience it (in a perfect world).

First off: thank you for this articulate and well-written article. It has gained me tremendous insight. This leads me to my first point: Why don't we talk more about this?

Seriously, I can relate to almost any situation (cancer, starvation, being gay), because I have a field of reference. I have lost quite a few family members to cancer, I can relate to starvation because I had one situation where I couldnt eat for a full day, my stomach was stabbing me all the way through. I can imagine that this is 10.000 times worse, if you haven't eaten in weeks.

I have numerous gay friends, and I supported a few when they were going through their personal problems (whether the cause is an unaccepting family, or being beaten up on the streets simply for holding hands with their boyfriend), I have held grown men, crying, in my arms.

All of this gives me an ability relate. I can place myself in someone's else situation. I cannot do this with rape. I wish that this topic would become more debatable, that it's more open, that rape victims no longer write their texts anonymously, that their hurt is known to as many people as possible. This is painful to many, and I can imagine that a lot of rape victims are embarrassed, even though it is not their fault.

But we need social awareness for this. To give people food for thought, to give them pause and to maybe, (MAYBE) prevent a rape from happening. Even if more public awareness saves only 10 people worldwide, that's an improvement on it's own and I will take any success that I can.

This crime needs a figure head, we need rallies, stop churches from hiding their clergy-men when they rape young boys on the altar, bring it all out in the open.

And most importantly: TELL. YOUR. FRIENDS. Yes, you may feel embarrassed, yeah, it will be awkward as hell and yeah, you might lose a few friends who can't deal with it. But the friends who stick with you will be the ones to support you through thick and thin. They will not be chanting "rape, rape, rape" during Game of Thrones (seriously, who does that? are your friends nuts?) and they will be more considerate of you (like not making you see Sin City).

A simple, far less dramatic example would be my weakness to blood. If I see surgery or blood flowing, I faint. Can't help it. And I have hurt myself while fainting, because those concrete walls don't politely step aside when you do. It was embarrassing as hell to me, and I got picked on at highschool because of it, majorly. It was murder.

But, I avoided movies/series/situations with blood by simply being open about it. I was candid. And the friends I have now, they know of my situation, they know how to deal with it, should I faint.

We need to get this out in the open.

P.S.
In regards to Tombraider, please forgive me for the developer for shooting his mouth on that situation. He is an idiot. What happens to Lara Croft in that game cannot even be considered rape, it's not even more than an attempted assault. Which is not surprising, considering the amount of men that she KILLS! Stop using this game as a scapegoat. That is all.

Helmholtz Watson:

Phasmal:
Wow, I really have no words.

I really hope (though the cynic in me obviously doubts) that some people might actually think that the people they are playing with are real people and that words mean things.

I don't participate in smack-talking, (I've called one or two people noobs, but I've never been involved in the angry stuff- because too often I'm on the end of it. Not for playing badly, just for being female), I disagree with people who insist that this is part of gaming that cant/shouldn't change, and I think those people need to wonder why they want to keep doing it so badly.

I think people need to get over it. Rape is a word just like killed, murdered, starving, beaten, and genocide are words. There is no reason why the word rape should be treated like something special while the words I mentioned get an ok.

OP:Sorry to hear about your experience but why is this an article on a video game site?
EDIT:If the author is trying to discourage people from using the term rape, I hope that they also feel the same way about words like murder, killed, genocide, starving and beating.

My drama lecturer from undergrad told us a story about when she staged a play in the UK several years ago. There was a scene involved where a shot was suddenly fired on stage, simulated by nothing more than a cap gun. Unfortunately for them, of all the people who could have been sitting in the audience that day, there was a group of American exchange students from Columbine High School. As in, students who had been present at that massacre. That shot triggered a PTSD breakdown for them, and that is why all plays we did had to have warnings beforehand if there was simulated gunfire on stage.

What's the point of this anecdote? It's all about context. You may say rape is 'just a word' and it's hypocritical to pursue words like rape while ignoring the casual use of other forms of violent speech. The difference is in the disclosure. No one goes into an online computer game expecting a violence free experience unless they're playing a Hello Kitty MMO. That's why you don't see Gulf War syndrome victims complaining about being told they'll get 'fragged' while playing Gears of War. However, plenty of people have a fair right to expect that they're not going to be subjected to the language of sexual violence while they're just playing a computer game to relax. The potential is just as likely for a scenario not unlike the one described above to play out.

It's not even a matter of censorship, merely civility. If you were playing football against someone and you taunted another player that you just 'raped them' when you scored, you'd be kicked off the field and, depending upon the code, subject to disciplinary action. Why should it be any different in online gaming? There are dozens of contextualised trash-talk words to use instead of 'rape'. If you want to get semantic about it, to say that you 'raped' someone in a game is to imply through analogy that you held them in a position where you dominated them completely and they were unable to fight back. Why do you need to use the word 'rape' at all when you could just say you 'owned' them and convey the same semantic understanding? Or is it really important for you that the sexual part of the analogy is preserved? Because if that's the case, then there's something downright creepy about it.

Therumancer:
Your taking a shotgun to the subject in hopes of hitting something. I'll start out in being blunt in saying (as I've said before) that I myself was raped by a gay man when I was six. In my cause though I blocked it out, which doesn't make it any easier when you know it happened.

Your name is familiar; I've seen you do alot of arguing typically against gay rights in many different threads. Seeing your name in a gay thread usually just pissed me off to the point of simply not reading your posts anymore but now I'm just expressing genuine curiosity. I just spent the past couple of hours debating if I should even bring this up but I just have to know: how do you know the man who raped you was a gay man? I mean was he someone you knew or was it something you found out later? Because reading that statement by itself and knowing your post history, I can't help but feel you might be projecting your feelings on pedophiles, rape and your personal experience onto homosexuals.

Powerful stuff. Put me in a bad mood, but that's ok. When I do well in a game I do sometimes think that I "Raped that team" or such and such, but I don't say it. That would make me uncomfortable if any victims were in the "room", so I don't take chances.

I do hate rapists, I do. Passionately. That crime's up there with Cold-blooded murder in terms of depravity, only in this one the victim has to live with what happened.

That being said, I find the prospect of a little role play in (consensual) sex to be exciting, and yes that is one scenario of mine that I'm not ashamed to admit exists. Having complete power, if only for a bit, over someone else. But that's if it's given to me freely, I could never take (only to play the role).

And that's why I'm confused by rapist mindsets. They think they're better or more powerful or they have more worth than someone else, and that's not true. Everyone has something important about them. When you try to take away someone's worth... that's just disgusting. I can see why it's very probable that mentioning the subject to a victim can bring very negative thoughts to their minds.

Thank you for writing this. Though I've never gone through it and know very few people that have, I feel for you, truly. Here's to your continued well-being. You've given my brain thoughts.

Anonymous:

Iron Lightning:
I'm sorry if this sounds insensitive but, Mr. Anonymous, you need to stop having the mentality of a fucking victim. You need to stop being a coward, trying as you do to block out anything to do with rape. It only represses your emotions and thus gives them more control over you. You need to stop living in fear.

Mr. Anonymous you, sir, are a damn coward right now. You're letting your fears govern your life and the more you continue to run away from your fears the more they will own you. You don't have to be a coward, Mr. Anonymous, you can find the courage to confront your fears if you just get out of the mentality of being permanently damaged. No matter what anyone tells you, you don't have to be a damaged man.

Hi Iron Lightning. A few things:

I think you're being misled by my being a self-described "rape victim." I understand how you could take this to mean I'm living my life with an attitude of victimization, but nothing could be further from the truth. I tend to use the words "rape victim" to describe myself because it helps me to remember that I was the victim of a crime. I realize that others prefer the term "rape survivor" because it has more empowering connotations, but that's never really sat right with me -- people "survive" natural events like hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes, things brought on by fate, whereas rape isn't a natural part of life: it's a conscious choice someone made to hurt you. When I realized that my experience was the fault of a specific person who did something society specifically set out a punishment for, it helped me come to terms with it better.

Believe me, I'm not "living in fear." If I was, would I be telling my story on the Internet? (I decided to be Anonymous mostly because of the social media/comments backlash some people have experienced when talking about this subject.)

I doubt anyone who knew me would say I have a "victim's" outlook on the world. I'm very successful, I'm highly extroverted, and I don't shy away from difficult subjects or topics. I'm adventurous and travel a lot. I'm social and have many friends, and after understanding better what was causing me problems in the arena of dating, I actually figured out that I was really good at it. In fact, even at my worst I was always doing excellent work and having a pretty good time -- despite that, I had things bubbling under the surface.

The fact that there are still things that bother me about my abuse doesn't contradict anything in the paragraph above. There's nothing wrong with the fact that I still have some things to work out, or find certain words hurtful. And hearing "rape" doesn't make me dissolve into a puddle of tears, it just makes it less fun to play games -- sometimes a little less fun, often a lot less fun, depending on my mood. Like everyone, I have good days and bad days. Sure, facing your fears is great, but I want to face them on my terms, not be forced into it on Xbox Live when I'm trying to relax.

I'm really sorry about what happened to you, and I'm glad you feel you're entirely recovered, (I always hesitate to use that word myself, since I've thought I was "recovered" before, only to have my symptoms get worse) and frankly some of the stuff you went through makes my episodes of depression sound like small beer. Hope all continues to go well, I appreciate how aggressively you've gone after life.

Thanks for responding. What caused me to worry is this paragraph:

Anonymous:
The experience of being raped has touched every aspect of my life. People like Ron Rosenberg, the PR head for Tomb Raider, tend to talk about rape like it's some character-building challenge to overcome, a wound that heals into scar tissue, making you tougher. That's a fundamental misunderstanding. Rape isn't a scar, it's a limp -- you carry it with you as long as you're alive, and it makes life harder, not easier. Being raped does change you: it's more than non-consensual sex, it's psychic murder. The person you were beforehand ceases to exist and you can never, ever be them again.

That sounds to me like a very defeatist attitude. If it is not representative of you then I'm sorry if I misunderstood you but I think you can see why I made that mistake. I surely hope that you do not subscribe to the mentality described above. Rape is not psychic murder and it need not cause you to walk everywhere with a limp. Sure, it will always be an event and it will never be fully comfortable. However, it's not something that will control your life and always be a daily palpable issue for you. From what you've told me it's probably gotten much better than a daily issue, so I'm glad for that. Sometimes people take on the mentality of a victim. The mentality that they're horribly and irreparably harmed and everything bad that happens to them can be blamed on their trauma. That if you break-up with someone it's because you couldn't trust them because of your trauma. I've seen that mindset more than a bit and it disturbs me.

I don't think you have that mindset now and I'm sorry for getting the wrong impression from your article. Also, it is very brave of you to post about it one the internet. I remember the first time I posted about my stuff on the internet (albeit much less in the spotlight) as the time in which I realized that I was finally about as comfortable with everything as I could hope to be. I'm also glad that you're not hiding from your fears as I mistakenly thought might've been the case.

In regards to your voice chat in games I can sympathize. I just get a bit zealous when people start questioning freedom of speech as I do not believe that you are. I'm sure we can agree that it would be folly to ban people just for saying uncomfortable things. However, I do think that more multiplayer games should have an "always mute everyone" function.

So, my friend, I'm glad that I was mistaken and you're not what I imagined. Remember, you will definitely get better one day and that's a certainty.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 . . . 20 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here