The R Word

[Helmholtz Watson]

Nobody is taking away that right! Its just that using that right, IN THIS WAY, is a douchebag thing to do.

As long as your not trying to make me abide by your rules, then that's fine that you don't agree with me.

They are not rules dammit. They are suggestions on how to be a decent human being.

While you might have been presenting it as a suggestion, other people like itsthesheppy have not, and instead they are presenting it like something I should be required to do.

 

[CaptainKarma]

Nobody is taking away that right! Its just that using that right, IN THIS WAY, is a douchebag thing to do.

As long as your not trying to make me abide by your rules, then that's fine that you don't agree with me.

They are not rules dammit. They are suggestions on how to be a decent human being.

While you might have been presenting it as a suggestion, other people like itsthesheppy have not, and instead they are presenting it like something I should be required to do.

Required in the sense of "this is a massive douchebag thing to do", not required as in "there should be some kind of LAW!".

So now that nobody is gonna force you to stop using rape, do you think maybe you'll stop it?

 

[Hevva]

Thank you, Anonymous, for this. I can't imagine the strain it took to write it. It was brave, in so many ways, to do so. To bear the weight of others, in effect. So thank you. Also, the writing was astounding.

As for the rest of the thread, I've got a question: what's wrong with being considerate? Why do we have to lash out at someone who's just asking for consideration? He's not trying to censor you, limit your life, shut you down, or insist that you adhere to the internet's version of the "feminist agenda" (which I honestly can't even begin to understand). He's shared something powerful and asked that you think on it, is all.

The writer's just asking you to not be a dick to others if you know how to avoid it. I'm sure you can manage that.

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

As expected the first page of comments is generally positive while the arguements sprout up like wildfires increasing in intensity as the post count goes up.

This article was clearly sensational, but I get the message. I for one don't use the term in its more casual form, but it strikes me that the number of victims in a massive outlet like Xbox Live is going to be a small percentage. On top of that, the victims themselves have presumably developed a coping method, and as unpleasant as it may be when coming across people throwing the word around you either ignore them, tell them to pipe down, or leave. It's an unrealistic expectation that all the desensitization afforded by modern media is going to be reversed by personal history recounts.

To sum up -- I am aware of the issue, and I do not condone it. But after having heard and read some truly horrendous things, I know that victims have to simply get by however they can. Hats off to them, all.

 

[Lex Darko]

I have to say what I find most interesting is actually the etymology of the word, rape. It originally meant what we call today kidnapping and was seldom used with the connotation of sexual assault.

Oddly the use of word in videogame culture as slang is truer to the origin of the word than its "proper" modern day use connoting sexual assault and molestation.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

This is true, but you also have responsibilities.

What responsibilities?

Foul mouthed is one thing. Casually slinging around the language of sexual violence is another.

No, it falls under the umbrella of the term "foul mouthed".

Video games are not real life: communication in them is however real life. Just because there's a mute button doesn't automatically free you of any responsibility to be considerate in how you address others.

Why not?

So you think upholding the right of people to talk in degrading hyperbole to make sure everyone fully understands just how much they won is the most important thing here.

I think that if I can say that I just "murdered" the last match, then I can also say that I just "raped" the last match.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

So now that nobody is gonna force you to stop using rape, do you think maybe you'll stop it?

No. I never actually used the word that much to begin with, but I'm going to reserve my right to express myself.

 

[CaptainKarma]

So now that nobody is gonna force you to stop using rape, do you think maybe you'll stop it?

No. I never actually used the word that much to begin with, but I'm going to reserve my right to express myself.

So "neener neener you can't stop me"? Stop being so childish.

 

[medv4380]

I have seen people use this argument to justify shouting "*** ***" at black people. Yes rape has multiple meanings. But you intending to use only one (and like *** people are referring to plundering when they say they raped someone at CoD) doesn't remove the association with the other.

You should look up what a false analogy is.
Your example is one where the context is clearly racist, and the subject at had is whether it is correct to use the word Rape to describe utter devastation which is a valid use of the word. Why do you think that word got pinned to that act in the first place?

Interesting how you actually glossed over my example in my original post. Are you afraid of actual intellectual debate?

 

[riles481]

Congratulations you've spent the better part of two days saying you have the right to say rape whenever you want in whatever context you want, meanwhile completely missing the emotional impact or the pain contained in the article in an effort to air your own grievances about you being "censored" and simultaneously trivializing rape, murder, genocide, and whatever else the hell you don't seem to care about.

This thread isn't about you or your right to talk like a butt-hurt asshole about people who don't agree with you, and for the record I find casual use of the word genocide as offensive as rape, to not do so is to not fully come to grips with the full implications of either word.

Call names all you want, I have my rights.

Also good that you feel the same way about murder and genocide as you do about rape.

This thread isn't about you
This thread isn't about you
This thread isn't about you

Congratulations, you have rights, now apply your reason and responsibility to those rights in ways that don't include being obnoxious.

 

[CaptainKarma]

I have seen people use this argument to justify shouting "*** ***" at black people. Yes rape has multiple meanings. But you intending to use only one (and like *** people are referring to plundering when they say they raped someone at CoD) doesn't remove the association with the other.

You should look up what a false analogy is.
Your example is one where the context is clearly racist, and the subject at had is whether it is correct to use the word Rape to describe utter devastation which is a valid use of the word. Why do you think that word got pinned to that act in the first place?

Interesting how you actually glossed over my example in my original post. Are you afraid of actual intellectual debate?

The point is words carry multiple meanings. You cannot always separate them out. Quibbling over the dictionary is pointless as it ignores the effect the words have.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

I'm stumbled for words. This was far too emotional for me to say anything to, so I'll say what everyone thinks:

Thank you for sharing, we have major admiration for your courage and we pray (even though quite a few of us aren't religious) that you find the strength to overcome your hardship.

 

[repeating integers]

This is true, but you also have responsibilities.

What responsibilities?

It varies depending on the context, but in this instance, I'd say that if anyone came and said they were hurt by your use of the term "rape" (or any other such word that you brought up) then you would have a responsibility to stop on their behalf. This is admittedly a subjective thing, like all morals, but I believe that your right to free speech ends when it begins to cause another person genuine distress.

As it happens, if somebody did request that you stop using terms like "rape" or "genocide" in a multiplayer game (assuming you had used them) what would you do?

 

[Allar]

Thank you, Anonymous, for this. I can't imagine the strain it took to write it. It was brave, in so many ways, to do so. To bear the weight of others, in effect. So thank you. Also, the writing was astounding.

As for the rest of the thread, I've got a question: what's wrong with being considerate? Why do we have to lash out at someone who's just asking for consideration? He's not trying to censor you, limit your life, shut you down, or insist that you adhere to the internet's version of the "feminist agenda" (which I honestly can't even begin to understand). He's shared something powerful and asked that you think on it, is all.

The writer's just asking you to not be a dick to others if you know how to avoid it. I'm sure you can manage that.

This. Why is it difficult to be kind or at least inoffensive? It's always mind-boggling to me when people think that just because they have a right to do something that automatically makes it a good idea. Sure you're free to say horrible things to other people over the internet but why? Just because you're allowed to be a dick doesn't mean you should exercise that right, especially in such a hurtful manner.

 

[JaredXE]

This thread isn't about you or your right to talk like a butt-hurt asshole about people who don't agree with you

Please be careful with what you say, there may be a a rape victim that reads those hurtful words. You need to always be watchful with what you say, no need to upset anyone with your opinions and random selection of sounds exiting from your mouth.

 

[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.

I don't paticularly want to de-rail this thread, but I'll say this much:

The gist of what your saying is pretty much loaded. The basic idea being that if someone like me has been victimized, we're effectively too biased to take a rational stance on the subject. If we haven't been victimized we're ignorant and "how could we know" based simply on rhetoric.

I will say this much. What happened to me has lead to me putting a lot of effort into learning about the subject, the gay community, and how things actually are. I know more about homosexuals, the gay rights movement, and the gay community, culture, and subcultures than most gay people within that culture do. It's kind of funny but in the past I've shocked people with some of the things I know, due to the assumption that someone who wasn't gay couldn't possibly know those things the way I did (and no, I won't go into details here). You'd be surprised at what you can do when properly motivated.

A point many people who argue gay rights with me miss is that I'm not talking bunk when I say that my position on the subject has waffled over the years before settling on my current point of view. Something based on what information I've had, and looking at the big picture, as well as the people I've known. It shocks some people think that I might have actually supported the rights of gay men at one time, and that I have to be lying about it, but it happens to be true. When I was in college I probably sat in on more ABIGAYLES meetings than most gay people did. My interests also caused me to look into certain trends and patterns of behavior more closely than most people have done when given a brief.

Despite what people might want to think, the reason why an arguement with me on this subject can't be "won" is because I happen to be right. They miss the point that I was sitting where a lot of the people argueing with me are decades ago, and I know what they think they know, and also realize that if they ever really looked into the subject with any kind of actual interest and effort, they would become me. Hence the constant prodding for people to do their own research, and do their own digging and such. It's the kind of situation where someone can't just tell you the truth, it has to be gained from experience. Of course it takes a decent amount of effort and without a motivating force like mine a lot of people are just going to take things at face value, and let's face it, tolerance is the easier path since it doesn't involve actually having to do anything, especially nowadays when there is already inertia for it.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

So now that nobody is gonna force you to stop using rape, do you think maybe you'll stop it?

No. I never actually used the word that much to begin with, but I'm going to reserve my right to express myself.

Stop being so childish.

Stop trying to tell me or "suggesting" how I should behave.

Congratulations you've spent the better part of two days saying you have the right to say rape whenever you want in whatever context you want, meanwhile completely missing the emotional impact or the pain contained in the article in an effort to air your own grievances about you being "censored" and simultaneously trivializing rape, murder, genocide, and whatever else the hell you don't seem to care about.

This thread isn't about you or your right to talk like a butt-hurt asshole about people who don't agree with you, and for the record I find casual use of the word genocide as offensive as rape, to not do so is to not fully come to grips with the full implications of either word.

Call names all you want, I have my rights.

Also good that you feel the same way about murder and genocide as you do about rape.

This thread isn't about you
This thread isn't about you
This thread isn't about you

When I'm being told how to behave it becomes about me.

This is true, but you also have responsibilities.

What responsibilities?

It varies depending on the context, but in this instance, I'd say that if anyone came and said they were hurt by your use of the term "rape" (or any other such word that you brought up) then you would have a responsibility to stop on their behalf. This is admittedly a subjective thing, like all morals, but I believe that your right to free speech ends when it begins to cause another person genuine distress.

I would disagree that I don't have the responsibility to make sure I don't offend somebody.

 

[Comando96]

You are a very brave person to even type that down.
Doing this is a sacrafice you have made, so that you can enlighten other people... speak for those who lose their voice. I had a tear in my eye frankly.

I am one of these people who... just has one of those faces... the face that everyone feels they can tell their deepest darkest problems and... hearing the life shattering experiances of other people, probably hasn't helped my depression.

One person I know was abused... when she was 6... the age the guy who did it means he's likely dead now... burning somewhere.

I never use the word rape innapropriately and I have a severe distaste for those who do...

 

[medv4380]

I have seen people use this argument to justify shouting "*** ***" at black people. Yes rape has multiple meanings. But you intending to use only one (and like *** people are referring to plundering when they say they raped someone at CoD) doesn't remove the association with the other.

You should look up what a false analogy is.
Your example is one where the context is clearly racist, and the subject at had is whether it is correct to use the word Rape to describe utter devastation which is a valid use of the word. Why do you think that word got pinned to that act in the first place?

Interesting how you actually glossed over my example in my original post. Are you afraid of actual intellectual debate?

The point is words carry multiple meanings. You cannot always separate them out. Quibbling over the dictionary is pointless as it ignores the effect the words have.

So my mother should change her name so she doesn't offend homosexuals?

We should censor Huck Fin because it uses the N-word in a racist context, and thus remove the intent to call out racism that the book was intended to convey?

Words have meanings and removing those meaning to make it so people can justify their offense I cannot condone.