The R Word

[Creatural]

Noooo, I told you it's because people can respond violently and destroy someone's productivity. It's the same reason you can't shout fire in a theater in the U.S. People can be harmed in a stampede to the point where they may not be alive, or else may be alive but lose productivity for a time and may not do something important for society that they've needed to.

Your continued use of examples that involve real life violence to this nonviolent situation still don't apply. Try again.

You just ignored those points by deciding people should know for sure who they're going to respond beforehand when they can't.

I'm not saying you should never ever say rape, but you need to not say it to everyone. You might make trigger someone to the point where they can't get their work done or worse commit suicide or hurt another person. And they won't plan on those things happening, nor have the knowledge to plan, before those things happen.

Why should you be allowed to say rape in the ways mentioned in the article when saying that may have these things as consequences?

Because I shouldn't be held accountable because for someone elses actions because they were offended. If a person kills another because I say "I just raped that last match!", they should go to prison, not me.

I told you they might commit suicide over being triggered. Stop ignoring my examples of real world violence like that or things like that in general. Also, most abusers are victims of some kind of abuse themselves and this includes rape. I'm not using fake examples and these are not nonviolent. They are very violent.

And again, it's not being offended, a trigger literally changes the chemistry in someone's brain. PTSD does more than offend someone. If it was just offending someone I'd say because it offends people. Actually, I wouldn't even say that, I wouldn't care if it was just offending someone.

And I wasn't saying you should go to prison for saying that as long as you didn't make anyone do something harmful, but if you triggered someone to the point they killed themselves, when you knew it could trigger someone, I would think that people should put you in jail, yes. You're part of society and subject to its rules and that means caring about other people enough to not be damaging to them.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

A terrible article with dangerous ramifications, and I demand an opportunity to provide a counterpoint even though I know I will not be allowed one.

....provide it here maybe?

I'm on probation already and every time I provide an opinion contrary to the popular one I get reported.

You might want to work on your delivery? Or perhaps you should consider the opinions you have on things, and why the things you say might negatively affect people?

If those were the rules, "The R Word" article would never be posted as it is a request to limit free speech. But nobody considers that because my view is the minority and thus does not count.

He's not forcing anybody to not say anything. He's saying that you should think before you speak because you could *be hurting someone* with your words.

Buuuut I don't think you really get that, seeing as how you've said that an article about a man baring his soul about one of the most excruciating things that can happen to a human being is a "terrible article with dangerous ramifications."

That may be one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard somebody say.

Not really helping your case against you being a terrible person, bucko.

 

[shoddyworksucks]

Also:Its fun to be allowed to express yourself, huh?

It must also be fun playing an edgy, straight shootin', truth-telling internet personality who looks at a poignant, personal account about rape and society and says, "What about me?! I like saying rape a lot!"

 

[lacktheknack]

A terrible article with dangerous ramifications, and I demand an opportunity to provide a counterpoint even though I know I will not be allowed one.

....provide it here maybe?

I'm on probation already and every time I provide an opinion contrary to the popular one I get reported.

You might want to work on your delivery? Or perhaps you should consider the opinions you have on things, and why the things you say might negatively affect people?

If those were the rules, "The R Word" article would never be posted as it is a request to limit free speech. But nobody considers that because my view is the minority and thus does not count.

He's not forcing anybody to not say anything. He's saying that you should think before you speak because you could *be hurting someone* with your words.

Buuuut I don't think you really get that, seeing as how you've said that an article about a man baring his soul about one of the most excruciating things that can happen to a human being is a "terrible article with dangerous ramifications."

That may be one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard somebody say.

And yet... somehow... they SAID THEM ANYWAYS.

If they were REALLY unable to say things like that, THERE WOULD BE NO SONG.

There's a reason I didn't post the actual video. It's heavily censored and the nude images of the band members would likely get me banned.

The existence of a more graphic video doesn't actually help your case... it hurts it.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I told you they might commit suicide over being triggered.

Then people who are suicidal should not be playing such games.

Also, most abusers are victims of some kind of abuse themselves and this includes rape. I'm not using fake examples and these are not nonviolent. They are very violent.

Then again, violent people should be watched and not playing games that might set them off.

And again, it's not being offended, a trigger literally changes the chemistry in someone's brain. PTSD does more than offend someone. If it was just offending someone I'd say because it offends people.

And I'm not going to walk on eggshells because somebody might have PTSD.

And I wasn't saying you should go to prison for saying that as long as you didn't make anyone do something harmful, but if you triggered someone to the point they killed themselves, when you knew it could trigger someone, I would think that people should put you in jail, yes.

Luckily your not running the judicial system.

You're part of society and subject to its rules and that means caring about other people enough to not be damaging to them.

I don't have the expectation to walk on egg shells.

 

[Danzavare]

snip

I have alternatives but I have the right to say what I want, regardless if you like it or not.

As for playing games, they can play them and mute me if they don't like me.

No comments on feminism.

I know, my arguments are a 'should' not 'have to' matter. I mean, you also have the right to say nothing but utterly stupid things. I wouldn't suggest it, there are plenty of intuitive and practical reasons why you shouldn't, but you still have the right to.

They can, but it shouldn't have to come to that.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not calling you stupid. I just mean to say not everything we 'can' do is something we 'should' do.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Also:Its fun to be allowed to express yourself, huh?

It must also be fun playing an edgy, straight shootin', truth-telling internet personality who looks at a poignant, personal account about rape and society and says, "What about me?! I like saying rape a lot!"

So do you have anything or worth to contribute, or are you too busy attacking my character?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

snip

I have alternatives but I have the right to say what I want, regardless if you like it or not.

As for playing games, they can play them and mute me if they don't like me.

No comments on feminism.

I know, my arguments are a 'should' not 'have to' matter. I mean, you also have the right to say nothing but utterly stupid things. I wouldn't suggest it, there are plenty of intuitive and practical reasons why you shouldn't, but you still have the right to.

They can, but it shouldn't have to come to that.

And I wouldn't suggest that you advocate that I should conduct myself according to your whims.

Thats your opinion I guess, I disagree.

 

[shoddyworksucks]

Reading through your argument, I'm certain that your character is at the heart of this entire issue.

 

[Callate]

Color me torn.

I really hate that anyone should ever do something to someone like the author described. That someone should do something like that to a child makes my blood boil. There are people close to me who have described similar experiences, and I suppose when it comes right down to it, I really can't entirely grasp the mindset such an event must cast over someone who has been a victim of sexual abuse.

And, yet...

Without going into detail, I've on more than one occasion seen people who portrayed themselves as victims demand the right to dictate the terms of any discussion tangentially related to what they viewed as their victimization, and my deeply felt response is, "no". No, you do not have that right.

I would never want to see a person of an Islamic faith become the target of slurs and violence because of that faith, but I will not lend condemnation to someone drawing an image of Mohammed because it might offend that person. I don't bristle with anger because Robert Downey Jr. used the words "full retard" in Tropic Thunder or because Chris Heimsworth made a joke related to adoption in The Avengers, and frankly I refuse to take such overbaked ire seriously. PETA's "chicken coops are like Nazi concentration camps" ad campaign makes me want to hurt the people responsible for their complete lack of perspective.

Someone once noted that for the vast majority of people, peanuts are an inexpensive and highly nutritious foodstuff. For a rare, tiny percentage, they're certain death. That's really unfortunate, and I don't want to see those people die- but I also don't feel it's remotely appropriate to put the majority of the onus for those people's safety on everybody else, especially if that comes hand in hand with an attitude that the allergic people should get to remain anonymous with the masses while everyone else bans peanuts from the table "just in case".

I recognize that it took courage for the author to write this article, and surely cost him something with regard to his emotional endurance. I welcome this as a contribution to the discussion, and to be clear, it's absolutely of far more value than some XBox Live player's "right" to make sexually explicit and derogatory comments on a whim in anonymity.

But the world is full of people's triggers, and I'm not even going to pretend to live life like I'm walking through a minefield.

 

[Creatural]

I told you they might commit suicide over being triggered.

Then people who are suicidal should not be playing such games.

Also, most abusers are victims of some kind of abuse themselves and this includes rape. I'm not using fake examples and these are not nonviolent. They are very violent.

Then again, violent people should be watched and not playing games that might set them off.

And again, it's not being offended, a trigger literally changes the chemistry in someone's brain. PTSD does more than offend someone. If it was just offending someone I'd say because it offends people.

And I'm not going to walk on eggshells because somebody might have PTSD.

And I wasn't saying you should go to prison for saying that as long as you didn't make anyone do something harmful, but if you triggered someone to the point they killed themselves, when you knew it could trigger someone, I would think that people should put you in jail, yes.

Luckily your not running the judicial system.

You're part of society and subject to its rules and that means caring about other people enough to not be damaging to them.

I don't have the expectation to walk on egg shells.

I didn't say they were suicidal before, remember I said people don't always know how they're going to respond until something happens. That also applies to the violence against others.

You haven't proven to me that you have the right to say rape whenever you like when you could potentially get someone hurt or killed.

I haven't proven to you that you need to avoid saying harmful things, but I do feel like I've said enough as I do believe people are somewhat responsible for the actions of others when they hurt them and I think this is where we disagree the most.

 

[lacktheknack]

A terrible article with dangerous ramifications, and I demand an opportunity to provide a counterpoint even though I know I will not be allowed one.

....provide it here maybe?

I'm on probation already and every time I provide an opinion contrary to the popular one I get reported.

You might want to work on your delivery? Or perhaps you should consider the opinions you have on things, and why the things you say might negatively affect people?

If those were the rules, "The R Word" article would never be posted as it is a request to limit free speech. But nobody considers that because my view is the minority and thus does not count.

He's not forcing anybody to not say anything. He's saying that you should think before you speak because you could *be hurting someone* with your words.

Buuuut I don't think you really get that, seeing as how you've said that an article about a man baring his soul about one of the most excruciating things that can happen to a human being is a "terrible article with dangerous ramifications."

That may be one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard somebody say.

And yet... somehow... they SAID THEM ANYWAYS.

If they were REALLY unable to say things like that, THERE WOULD BE NO SONG.

There's a reason I didn't post the actual video. It's heavily censored and the nude images of the band members would likely get me banned.

The existence of a more graphic video doesn't actually help your case... it hurts it.

My "case" is actually quite simple and is infallible: I can't say what I want to. You cannot deny that I am being limited in my argument against the R word article or even in posting a youtube video. Regardless of whether you somehow prove everyone who doesn't share your opinions are all insensitive dickheads, my point has already been proven. I'm being censored, right now.

...Because you're on a private website with their own subset of rules.

Censorship is an overarching ban on something you wish to communicate.

There is nothing, NOTHING, stopping you from going to /b/ and saying literally anything you want (that doesn't involve CP, but that's not censorship, that's purely illegal). NOTHING. Thus, you are not being censored any more than tank tops are censored because my high school didn't allow them.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I didn't say they were suicidal before, remember I said people don't always know how they're going to respond until something happens. That also applies to the violence against others.

All the more reason why people shouldn't be expected to walk on eggshells.

You haven't proven to me that you have the right to say rape whenever you like when you could potentially get someone hurt or killed.

Yes I have, just look at the part of what you typed that I made bold. "People don't always know how they're going to respond until something happens".

I haven't proven to you that you need to avoid saying harmful things, but I do feel like I've said enough as I do believe people are somewhat responsible for the actions of others when they hurt them and I think this is where we disagree the most.

When I tell someone to harm others, you may have a point. However, I haven't said that I would do that. I said that I have the right to express how I have just done well in a game by saying that I "raped" something.

 

[Shjade]

I never claimed you were shooting them to death, so again your reading comprehension fails.

..lol, ok. I guess I'm not killing them, just cause serious physical harm. Point still stands that your example doesn't hold up because I'm not physically harming someone like I would if I shot them.

As an aside, I find it rather funny that you're throwing around "appeal to emotion" so often as if you think it will lend some kind of additional weight or intellectual value to your own position. The reason I find this funny is that your position is, itself, based on emotional reasoning. Specifically, you choose not to limit your freedom of expression because "it isn't fun." Not only an emotional (and selfish) reason, but an incredibly shallow emotion at that.

Your hypocrisy amuses me.

Glad your amused, but my argument has been about my right to express myself.

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.

Emotional harm can be as damaging as physical harm. As others have said before, and as I will repeat (knowing full well you aren't going to acknowledge it regardless), the problem isn't offending people. Any number of things you might say might offend someone. That happens all the time. The point here is that you actually harm people. 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.).

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.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

Oh, if only rape was just as bad as losing in a game of Halo...

Anonymous, I get the feeling I can't say much to you that'll mean anything. I don't have that kind of authority. But still, thank you for writing this. I had no idea, I always seem to forget that insults were made to be harmful, and can hurt some much more than others. Damn, Xbox Live needs a new vocabulary...

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Late to the party and all but imo its the responsibility of the person who might be offended to not subject themselves to situations that might offend them.

Not the responsibility of the whole world to change their behavior on the off chance someone might not like it.

And XBox live is a sewer. Complaining about it is like finding a dog turd in your lawn, taking a big bite, then whining that it doesn't taste good. Just do what any sensible person does, turn off voice chat.

 

[Danzavare]

snip

I have alternatives but I have the right to say what I want, regardless if you like it or not.

As for playing games, they can play them and mute me if they don't like me.

No comments on feminism.

I know, my arguments are a 'should' not 'have to' matter. I mean, you also have the right to say nothing but utterly stupid things. I wouldn't suggest it, there are plenty of intuitive and practical reasons why you shouldn't, but you still have the right to.

They can, but it shouldn't have to come to that.

And I wouldn't suggest that you advocate that I should conduct myself according to your whims.

Thats your opinion I guess, I disagree.

(You posted before I submitted my edit. Oh well, it wasn't that important. <.<; )

Characterising it as a whim is more than a tad dismissive. It's good manners and basic compassion at little to no cost for good benefits. It's an intuitive and reasonable desire to have, that people strengthen their vocabulary a little to avoid an unnecessary but destructive problem. So no, it's not just a whim as you call it.

That being said, my request doesn't require an entire change in conduct. Just a tiny bit of education and a better use of words. It's an easy solution to solve an unnecessary problem.

It's really not that scary, I promise.

 

[Creatural]

I didn't say they were suicidal before, remember I said people don't always know how they're going to respond until something happens. That also applies to the violence against others.

All the more reason why people shouldn't be expected to walk on eggshells.

You haven't proven to me that you have the right to say rape whenever you like when you could potentially get someone hurt or killed.

Yes I have, just look at the part of what you typed that I made bold. "People don't always know how they're going to respond until something happens".

I haven't proven to you that you need to avoid saying harmful things, but I do feel like I've said enough as I do believe people are somewhat responsible for the actions of others when they hurt them and I think this is where we disagree the most.

When I tell someone to harm others, you may have a point. However, I haven't said that I would do that. I said that I have the right to express how I have just done well in a game by saying that I "raped" something.

What are you even saying? When I say you don't know what's going to happen I'm telling you that you might hurt someone in the worst way possible and you shouldn't say it because of that. If anything that proves even more that you shouldn't say what you know could hurt someone. You haven't convinced me of anything, don't spin things to try to make it look like I said I thought you proved something to me you haven't, that's dishonest.

And yes you can harm someone by saying you raped something. This article wouldn't exist if you couldn't hurt someone by saying that word.

Just accept that you haven't convinced me and move on with your life.

 

[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.

 

[Taunta]

I always love when rude people try to cloak themselves in the first amendment to justify being purposely abrasive.

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.

Also your "but I think it's fun!" is also an appeal to emotion. Just by the way. When the original discussion is about human emotion and civility, then brushing arguments off as "appeals to emotion, didn't read" doesn't work.

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.

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. (Anon's example of his Game of Thrones party is a good example of what could happen when you run your mouth around people that you don't know are okay with it.) 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 never thought I'd have to explain "Why you can't say certain things in public".

OT: I wanted to thank you Anon, and commend you on how brave you are to put something like this out on the interwebs. I can't tell you that I understand your experience, because I don't, but I will offer that I've had to write about (different) traumatic experiences of my own and I know it's not easy to put those words down, much less having to live through all those emotions while you try to write it. I can't imagine how emotionally exhausted you must have been after finishing, but the internet is better for it, I think.

This was a really heavy article and I hope it will open some eyes out there. That bit about the sound of your arm breaking was so real and so visceral, I became nauseous. Lots of respect to you as a writer for that.

Thank you for this, Anon.