• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 07:33
CEST 13:33
KST 20:33
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week6[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall12HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles7[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China10Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL79
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles Server Blocker RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion A cwal.gg Extension - Easily keep track of anyone
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues 2025 ACS Season 2 Qualifier Small VOD Thread 2.0 Last Minute Live-Report Thread Resource!
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project The PlayStation 5 Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine The Accidental Video Game Porn Archive Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Men Take Risks, Women Win Ga…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 767 users

"Rape" and Game Culture - Page 24

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 22 23 24 25 26 33 Next All
Hidden_MotiveS
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
Canada2562 Posts
August 13 2010 22:34 GMT
#461
On August 14 2010 07:26 revy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:23 PanN wrote:
The English language is constantly evolving, not always for the best, but it is. A word like "rape" shouldn't be offensive when used in the terms of owning someone etc in a videogame, because thats what that word means in that setting. Multiple other examples but whatever.


This.

I can understand this argument, but why don't sports casters ever use words like retarded or gay? Are gamers less mature than sports fans? No, but the word was able to slip by because of the low restrictions we've had on online speech.

I doubt we can remove words like "gay" used as "stupid" from everyday vernacular, but commentators at least, should not use them.


Anyways, I find how this thread has grown kind of sad too, I'd rather some more entertaining thread were growing like this. I liked coming by TL to chill.
Sabu113
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
United States11047 Posts
August 13 2010 22:35 GMT
#462
On August 14 2010 06:22 Ploppytheman wrote:
Rape has more than one meaning. Stop crying you PoS liberal PC nazi.


Not to be as harsh as this man, but I agree with the sentiment running through the thread that words can have multiple meanings. Also, I think that it is one thing to be conscientious, but where do you draw the line? If there's no intent to cause harm, it's a bit absurd to hold that person liable (in regard to language).

TlDr: It is not impolite to use rape to describe something in a gaming context.
Biomine is a drunken chick who is on industrial strength amphetamines and would just grab your dick and jerk it as hard and violently as she could while screaming 'OMG FUCK ME', because she saw it in a Sasha Grey video ...-Wombat_Ni
Slow Motion
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States6960 Posts
August 13 2010 22:36 GMT
#463
I mean, if someone has another word that can successfully connote how I got my soul ripped out of me, totally dominated by a stronger force over my weak trembling body, and violated in every way the first time I was killed with mass voidrays on Metalopolis I will gladly use it.
sadyque
Profile Joined April 2010
Romania251 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:38:59
August 13 2010 22:36 GMT
#464
On August 14 2010 07:31 johnlee wrote:
Here's an excerpt from a book No One Owns You by Andrew Knight, which pretty much sums up how I feel about this:
+ Show Spoiler +

"There is, in my opinion, nothing inherently wrong, vulgar, violent, or indecent about any language, including profanity. Words are just fucking words. Without doubt, they can be used (in conjunction with raised voices and aggressive body language) to intimidate and verbally abuse others. However, the mere use of these words to communicate is not, per se, violent. So what might a Libertarian say about a hypersensitive Puritan woman who is stuck in the same room with a man who honed his vocabulary in a federal penitentiary? Assume that the man has no intention of being violent but, in speaking naturally, discusses things the Puritan finds acutely objectionable and in a language that makes her want to squeal in disgust.

Let’s make no mistake: the Puritan experiences emotional trauma by the man’s words. In some metaphysical sense, the man’s nonviolent words are causing her pain, but only in conjunction with her hypersensitivity. Who is to blame and what should be done to alleviate the pain?

First, to assign blame here is to assume that someone is acting wrongly. I suggest that neither is wrong. The Puritan woman is merely reacting according to her pre-programming and emotional conditioning, and so is the man. In other words, they are both merely being themselves. Because the man is not being offensively violent to the woman, and also because he is not intending to harm her, the woman has no right to use violence against him in defense. Without an offense, there is no defense. Libertarianism respects the right of every person to be himself and to act, speak, and live freely to the extent that he does not violate the rights of others. The woman’s rights to life, liberty, and property have not been abrogated by the man’s choice of words.

To assert that neither is to blame and that no offensive attack has occurred is not to invalidate the woman’s feelings. Indeed, she does feel pain (of discomfort, at the very least) and she is not to blame for having these feelings. However, she is responsible for them. She must be held accountable for the ease with which she feels pain. A hypersensitive person cannot expect the world’s inhabitants to tiptoe around her in constant fear that she will be disturbed by the sounds of their footfall. People are people. Sometimes they’re loud. Sometimes they’re obnoxious. Sometimes they get in our way. But we share this tiny planet with several billion of them. To require every person to conform to our individual standards of comfort or morality would be chaotic as there are several billion such standards – one for each person. But to let people be themselves, to accept and understand even if we don’t agree – that is the recipe for peace and tranquility.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is the woman’s responsibility to either leave the room or to learn to accept the man for who he is. The woman’s pain – a very real and understandable pain – is nonetheless her problem, not his. To hold otherwise would be to allow the world to be controlled by the most hypersensitive people. I say: let them be sensitive. Let them take offense. Let them be perpetually annoyed, bothered, angry, and judgemental. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to be the free, unhindered, joyful child that I am. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to live without artificial constraints, respecting the rights of others to live freely, and with little concern as to who may find me offensive, rude, or socially inept.
To require every person to stay in his own space, to tread lightly, to speak softly, to conform to the hypersensitive person’s arbitrary standards and notions of decency is to blame every person for his very existence. Humans are creatures of nature. Neither the Victorian Era nor the Industrial Revolution changed the fact that we are all, fundamentally, children. Children are loud, cantankerous, silly, rude animals and they neither understand nor fully obey societal rules. On the other hand, to set a very high threshold for discomfort – to let the people around you be themselves without your resorting to anger, judgement, or criticism – is one of the kindest gifts you can bestow on the world. You can meaningfully contribute to humanity by accepting others as they are and decreasing your sensitivity to their differing opinions and ways of life.

The Puritan woman need not like the man, nor is she required to engage in conversation with him. But he has not offensively attacked her and, therefore, she has no defensive recourse. She has three options: a) continue to experience pain; b) leave the room; or c) learn to accept the man as he is, reduce her sensitivities, and increase her pain threshold. Of course, option a) seems unwise and option b) will doom the woman to isolation and loneliness. After all, we’ve all known lonely elderly folks stuck in retirement homes whom few will visit for fear of their judgements, hypersensitivity, and manipulation. Arguably, the woman’s best option is c): she has the power to accept the man as he is. She need not feel pain when surrounded by people who look differently, speak differently, and have different priorities than she does.

I believe that it is every person’s responsibility, both for his own happiness as well as that of the world’s populace, to shed his sensitivities and artificial dictates about how others “should” act, speak, dress, and live. The Puritan woman may feel a very real discomfort to which we can all empathize, but that is her problem to solve. To allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards."


Erm so your point is that if we allow a woman who was raped to have a problem with that then we " allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards"+ Show Spoiler +
60 bucks? But it has Kerrigans Boobs in three god damn dimensions. Do you know how long i have waited for this?
TheTester
Profile Joined March 2010
United States172 Posts
August 13 2010 22:37 GMT
#465
There are lots of "emotionally charged words" if you go by what you say. How about:
Abuse
Harass
Stalk
anything violent related
Own
anything race related, including words like Black (which was censored during beta btw)


You can go and censor anything that might have ever done people discomfort, or you can just realize that they're only words and people having a mental trigger on a word need help.
SpicyCrab
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
402 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:43:07
August 13 2010 22:38 GMT
#466
Heartfelt Entreaty

lightman
Well I guess shit like this happens all the time.

My girlfriend got raped, doesn't matter the circumstances the fact is that, and when she told it to me I really listened her very calmy, of course my first reaction was anger and well you know, "I'm going to find the sucker and kill him even if the world cracks down", but now I'm pretty calm and I think things like "then what?, will that really ease and remove the pain and suffering she's going through, and return happiness to her life?. It will not".


Response:


My only question is...


What map was it on?



Yeah, I guess you guys are right. That was a really funny joke and the positive response it received in the thread in question was totally great and speaks very highly of our community.

Just a small illustration of the REAL attitudes that our lexicon creates. That's the last i'll post in the thread.
I'm such a baller in my dreams. - HiFriend
Slow Motion
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States6960 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:41:35
August 13 2010 22:40 GMT
#467
On August 14 2010 07:34 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:26 revy wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:23 PanN wrote:
The English language is constantly evolving, not always for the best, but it is. A word like "rape" shouldn't be offensive when used in the terms of owning someone etc in a videogame, because thats what that word means in that setting. Multiple other examples but whatever.


This.

I can understand this argument, but why don't sports casters ever use words like retarded or gay? Are gamers less mature than sports fans? No, but the word was able to slip by because of the low restrictions we've had on online speech.

I doubt we can remove words like "gay" used as "stupid" from everyday vernacular, but commentators at least, should not use them.


Anyways, I find how this thread has grown kind of sad too, I'd rather some more entertaining thread were growing like this. I liked coming by TL to chill.

Sports casters don't cuss or say anything offensive because they have to appeal to a larger audience, for the sake of $$$ and sponsors, and also they have to deal with the FCC. I'm fine with casters doing this if they want to get large sponsors and go pro (in fact I would recommend it). However, a lot of us are basically the internet version of guys hanging out with beers and watching a game. And lets not pretend that some fucked up shit doesn't come out of your mouth during those times.
Render
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States249 Posts
August 13 2010 22:42 GMT
#468
On August 14 2010 06:46 Roe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 06:33 thatdontmakecent wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Thank you thank you thank you OP. I have been trying to formulate the words for this for so long. I understand that 'rape' is embedded in gaming culture, but just think how it sounds to the outside world. Gaming and gamers will continue to garner an adolescent (and horridly immature) reputation if we insist on defending the use of word like this. YOU don't think it's a big deal. I get it. It is. So stop. It's a small change with a hugely positive impact. You can't know how it affects people if it hasn't happened to you, so by saying it you are speaking out of ignorance, and then defending our own ignorance. It sounds moronic. Consider yourself lucky you don't know what it's like, and defer to the people who are asking you to stop.  Being competitive is one thing, being grossly macho and sophomoric is something else. 

If you disagree, ok. But think about it? Please?

Great post OP.

 What would you do if those words offended someone? Sophomore is just someone in second year of high school. By yours and the OP's argument you must adhere to my sentiment of, let's make up a common story, being picked on by the seniors for being a sophomore. I was bullied and picked on and physically abused, and you using that word makes me feel terrible.
 
 How do you feel about that logic? Are you enticed to cater to my wishes because you had a different meaning, as well as different aim in your statement?


I'm not going to get dragged into a flame war with you. Look up the word sophomoric, it means more than just being a sophomore in high school. The words I used describe how we look when we use words line that. We look immature. It isn't asking much to stop using a horrible word. You will make whatever decisions you want, I'm just asking you to think about how it looks when we use words like that. 
Rose my color is and white, pretty mouth and green my eyes.
Lebeog
Profile Joined August 2010
United States10 Posts
August 13 2010 22:42 GMT
#469
On August 14 2010 07:27 ToxNub wrote:
Ugh.

The whole idea of "offensive language" is retarded from the get go. (I bet "retarded" is offensive too?) You can be offended by anything. Stereotyping users of profanity or offensive language as "kids", "tragically depressing indicators of our decaying times", or uneducated, ignorant, or whatever, is completely hypocritical, and just a trip through your own list of prejudices.

In fact, the irony is that users of these "offensive" words, use them flippantly, hence, their usage should hardly offend anyone. They also rarely get offended when receiving the same. Because they know they're just harmless words. What exactly is the difference between "poop" and "shit"? Tell me. Why is one bad, and one isn't? What exactly is the difference between "fuck" and "sleep with"? What's really the difference between "rape" and "dominate"? Suppose I said, "I am going to forcibly penetrate you" to my opponent. Is that better or worse? What exactly is the value function that determines the offensiveness of a given string of words?

Somewhere along the line, somebody decided that they weren't going to tolerate some arbitrarily offensive language, and then they whipped up everyone else they could, to give shit to people who didn't respect their arbitrary set of rules. It's another nonsense threat that people use to gain control over how you behave. Let's face it here, if you are offended by a random person you don't know using a word in a completely different context in reference to another person you don't know, then this is quite clearly YOUR problem, and not theirs. Even the assertion that "your language is offensive and mine is not" is a self-absorbed notion buried deep in your own narrow-mindedness.

People mock and slander the things I hold dear on a daily basis. I am exposed to reminders of traumatic events, every damn day. And yet, I wouldn't have it any different.

As Penn and Teller put it "You do not have the right to not be offended". They've also run an excellent profanity episode, which I hope everyone has seen.

Now that's not to say that you should cuss out your grandma, or say "fuck" 42 times in a job interview, or intentionally incite anger in people, because often the rewards outweigh the sacrifice. But when you so choose to apply them, they don't have to like it, they don't have to be your friend, they don't have to hire you, but they damn well can't tell you any different.


You seem really determined to offend others. Avoiding the use of the words "rape," "retard," "fag," etc. in inappropriate contexts is not an incredibly difficult thing to do.
StarStruck
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
25339 Posts
August 13 2010 22:43 GMT
#470
On August 14 2010 07:34 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:26 revy wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:23 PanN wrote:
The English language is constantly evolving, not always for the best, but it is. A word like "rape" shouldn't be offensive when used in the terms of owning someone etc in a videogame, because thats what that word means in that setting. Multiple other examples but whatever.


This.

I can understand this argument, but why don't sports casters ever use words like retarded or gay? Are gamers less mature than sports fans? No, but the word was able to slip by because of the low restrictions we've had on online speech.

I doubt we can remove words like "gay" used as "stupid" from everyday vernacular, but commentators at least, should not use them.


Anyways, I find how this thread has grown kind of sad too, I'd rather some more entertaining thread were growing like this. I liked coming by TL to chill.



Guess you missed my posts because I already addressed this. A simple search should suffice.
johnlee
Profile Joined June 2009
United States242 Posts
August 13 2010 22:44 GMT
#471
On August 14 2010 07:36 sadyque wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:31 johnlee wrote:
Here's an excerpt from a book No One Owns You by Andrew Knight, which pretty much sums up how I feel about this:
+ Show Spoiler +

"There is, in my opinion, nothing inherently wrong, vulgar, violent, or indecent about any language, including profanity. Words are just fucking words. Without doubt, they can be used (in conjunction with raised voices and aggressive body language) to intimidate and verbally abuse others. However, the mere use of these words to communicate is not, per se, violent. So what might a Libertarian say about a hypersensitive Puritan woman who is stuck in the same room with a man who honed his vocabulary in a federal penitentiary? Assume that the man has no intention of being violent but, in speaking naturally, discusses things the Puritan finds acutely objectionable and in a language that makes her want to squeal in disgust.

Let’s make no mistake: the Puritan experiences emotional trauma by the man’s words. In some metaphysical sense, the man’s nonviolent words are causing her pain, but only in conjunction with her hypersensitivity. Who is to blame and what should be done to alleviate the pain?

First, to assign blame here is to assume that someone is acting wrongly. I suggest that neither is wrong. The Puritan woman is merely reacting according to her pre-programming and emotional conditioning, and so is the man. In other words, they are both merely being themselves. Because the man is not being offensively violent to the woman, and also because he is not intending to harm her, the woman has no right to use violence against him in defense. Without an offense, there is no defense. Libertarianism respects the right of every person to be himself and to act, speak, and live freely to the extent that he does not violate the rights of others. The woman’s rights to life, liberty, and property have not been abrogated by the man’s choice of words.

To assert that neither is to blame and that no offensive attack has occurred is not to invalidate the woman’s feelings. Indeed, she does feel pain (of discomfort, at the very least) and she is not to blame for having these feelings. However, she is responsible for them. She must be held accountable for the ease with which she feels pain. A hypersensitive person cannot expect the world’s inhabitants to tiptoe around her in constant fear that she will be disturbed by the sounds of their footfall. People are people. Sometimes they’re loud. Sometimes they’re obnoxious. Sometimes they get in our way. But we share this tiny planet with several billion of them. To require every person to conform to our individual standards of comfort or morality would be chaotic as there are several billion such standards – one for each person. But to let people be themselves, to accept and understand even if we don’t agree – that is the recipe for peace and tranquility.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is the woman’s responsibility to either leave the room or to learn to accept the man for who he is. The woman’s pain – a very real and understandable pain – is nonetheless her problem, not his. To hold otherwise would be to allow the world to be controlled by the most hypersensitive people. I say: let them be sensitive. Let them take offense. Let them be perpetually annoyed, bothered, angry, and judgemental. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to be the free, unhindered, joyful child that I am. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to live without artificial constraints, respecting the rights of others to live freely, and with little concern as to who may find me offensive, rude, or socially inept.
To require every person to stay in his own space, to tread lightly, to speak softly, to conform to the hypersensitive person’s arbitrary standards and notions of decency is to blame every person for his very existence. Humans are creatures of nature. Neither the Victorian Era nor the Industrial Revolution changed the fact that we are all, fundamentally, children. Children are loud, cantankerous, silly, rude animals and they neither understand nor fully obey societal rules. On the other hand, to set a very high threshold for discomfort – to let the people around you be themselves without your resorting to anger, judgement, or criticism – is one of the kindest gifts you can bestow on the world. You can meaningfully contribute to humanity by accepting others as they are and decreasing your sensitivity to their differing opinions and ways of life.

The Puritan woman need not like the man, nor is she required to engage in conversation with him. But he has not offensively attacked her and, therefore, she has no defensive recourse. She has three options: a) continue to experience pain; b) leave the room; or c) learn to accept the man as he is, reduce her sensitivities, and increase her pain threshold. Of course, option a) seems unwise and option b) will doom the woman to isolation and loneliness. After all, we’ve all known lonely elderly folks stuck in retirement homes whom few will visit for fear of their judgements, hypersensitivity, and manipulation. Arguably, the woman’s best option is c): she has the power to accept the man as he is. She need not feel pain when surrounded by people who look differently, speak differently, and have different priorities than she does.

I believe that it is every person’s responsibility, both for his own happiness as well as that of the world’s populace, to shed his sensitivities and artificial dictates about how others “should” act, speak, dress, and live. The Puritan woman may feel a very real discomfort to which we can all empathize, but that is her problem to solve. To allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards."


Erm so your point is that if we allow a woman who was raped to have a problem with that then we " allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards"+ Show Spoiler +


Yep. If we let a woman who was raped push onto us HER issues with the way WE use the word, then we definitely a problem.
I'm not okay-ing the fact that woman was raped. I'm saying that the fact that she is trying to use her rape experiences (which was clearly unfortunate) to disallow a gaming community or anything else for that matter from using the word, is wrong when it's clear that we are not using the word rape in the sense that she experienced.

It's as simple as that.
Bore
jeddus
Profile Blog Joined September 2005
United States832 Posts
August 13 2010 22:44 GMT
#472
I tried to come up with an intelligent response, but all I could think of were rap lyrics.

I choose not to post them.

User was warned for this post
sex appeal
danson
Profile Joined April 2010
United States689 Posts
August 13 2010 22:48 GMT
#473
the reason gamers are prone to say rape, faggot, and even N****r, is because we are too desensitized to common profanity. If some zerg 6pooled you, and you went into a rage and said "FUCK YOU FUCKER" It just doesnt have any meaning behind, so people go on to use things that are stronger... but since "fuck" IS the strongest word, you then have to move onto something borderline risky. Like faggot, which pushes some peoples buttons... some people use rape. which pushes more peoples button, and then some people even use racist slurs... not because they are racist, but because its the only words they can say that cause people to say "oh my god he just called me a ____!"
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France7884 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:50:32
August 13 2010 22:49 GMT
#474
Rape is not cool.

But shooting someone in the face with an AK47 is not cool neither. For me it is more wrong to play CS were you have to kill your opponent, than using the word rape. When I say "Oh shit", I'm not really talking about fecal matter.

Same deal.

That's why I got raped by a C+ player this afternoon, but I don't pllay Counter Strike or any FPS, that I find purely shocking.

Starcraft is an other deal since you are not impersonating (if that means anything at all, I'm sure you understand) your marines and your hydralisks (preventing counter argument coming.)
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
huameng
Profile Blog Joined April 2007
United States1133 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:50:25
August 13 2010 22:49 GMT
#475
On August 14 2010 07:44 johnlee wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:36 sadyque wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:31 johnlee wrote:
Here's an excerpt from a book No One Owns You by Andrew Knight, which pretty much sums up how I feel about this:
+ Show Spoiler +

"There is, in my opinion, nothing inherently wrong, vulgar, violent, or indecent about any language, including profanity. Words are just fucking words. Without doubt, they can be used (in conjunction with raised voices and aggressive body language) to intimidate and verbally abuse others. However, the mere use of these words to communicate is not, per se, violent. So what might a Libertarian say about a hypersensitive Puritan woman who is stuck in the same room with a man who honed his vocabulary in a federal penitentiary? Assume that the man has no intention of being violent but, in speaking naturally, discusses things the Puritan finds acutely objectionable and in a language that makes her want to squeal in disgust.

Let’s make no mistake: the Puritan experiences emotional trauma by the man’s words. In some metaphysical sense, the man’s nonviolent words are causing her pain, but only in conjunction with her hypersensitivity. Who is to blame and what should be done to alleviate the pain?

First, to assign blame here is to assume that someone is acting wrongly. I suggest that neither is wrong. The Puritan woman is merely reacting according to her pre-programming and emotional conditioning, and so is the man. In other words, they are both merely being themselves. Because the man is not being offensively violent to the woman, and also because he is not intending to harm her, the woman has no right to use violence against him in defense. Without an offense, there is no defense. Libertarianism respects the right of every person to be himself and to act, speak, and live freely to the extent that he does not violate the rights of others. The woman’s rights to life, liberty, and property have not been abrogated by the man’s choice of words.

To assert that neither is to blame and that no offensive attack has occurred is not to invalidate the woman’s feelings. Indeed, she does feel pain (of discomfort, at the very least) and she is not to blame for having these feelings. However, she is responsible for them. She must be held accountable for the ease with which she feels pain. A hypersensitive person cannot expect the world’s inhabitants to tiptoe around her in constant fear that she will be disturbed by the sounds of their footfall. People are people. Sometimes they’re loud. Sometimes they’re obnoxious. Sometimes they get in our way. But we share this tiny planet with several billion of them. To require every person to conform to our individual standards of comfort or morality would be chaotic as there are several billion such standards – one for each person. But to let people be themselves, to accept and understand even if we don’t agree – that is the recipe for peace and tranquility.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is the woman’s responsibility to either leave the room or to learn to accept the man for who he is. The woman’s pain – a very real and understandable pain – is nonetheless her problem, not his. To hold otherwise would be to allow the world to be controlled by the most hypersensitive people. I say: let them be sensitive. Let them take offense. Let them be perpetually annoyed, bothered, angry, and judgemental. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to be the free, unhindered, joyful child that I am. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to live without artificial constraints, respecting the rights of others to live freely, and with little concern as to who may find me offensive, rude, or socially inept.
To require every person to stay in his own space, to tread lightly, to speak softly, to conform to the hypersensitive person’s arbitrary standards and notions of decency is to blame every person for his very existence. Humans are creatures of nature. Neither the Victorian Era nor the Industrial Revolution changed the fact that we are all, fundamentally, children. Children are loud, cantankerous, silly, rude animals and they neither understand nor fully obey societal rules. On the other hand, to set a very high threshold for discomfort – to let the people around you be themselves without your resorting to anger, judgement, or criticism – is one of the kindest gifts you can bestow on the world. You can meaningfully contribute to humanity by accepting others as they are and decreasing your sensitivity to their differing opinions and ways of life.

The Puritan woman need not like the man, nor is she required to engage in conversation with him. But he has not offensively attacked her and, therefore, she has no defensive recourse. She has three options: a) continue to experience pain; b) leave the room; or c) learn to accept the man as he is, reduce her sensitivities, and increase her pain threshold. Of course, option a) seems unwise and option b) will doom the woman to isolation and loneliness. After all, we’ve all known lonely elderly folks stuck in retirement homes whom few will visit for fear of their judgements, hypersensitivity, and manipulation. Arguably, the woman’s best option is c): she has the power to accept the man as he is. She need not feel pain when surrounded by people who look differently, speak differently, and have different priorities than she does.

I believe that it is every person’s responsibility, both for his own happiness as well as that of the world’s populace, to shed his sensitivities and artificial dictates about how others “should” act, speak, dress, and live. The Puritan woman may feel a very real discomfort to which we can all empathize, but that is her problem to solve. To allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards."


Erm so your point is that if we allow a woman who was raped to have a problem with that then we " allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards"+ Show Spoiler +


Yep. If we let a woman who was raped push onto us HER issues with the way WE use the word, then we definitely a problem.
I'm not okay-ing the fact that woman was raped. I'm saying that the fact that she is trying to use her rape experiences (which was clearly unfortunate) to disallow a gaming community or anything else for that matter from using the word, is wrong when it's clear that we are not using the word rape in the sense that she experienced.

It's as simple as that.


Would it be incorrect to sum up your views as "I don't care one iota about you, deal with it"?

I think we should care about these people and not use offensive words. I don't get why such a tiny thing that could make so many people hurt less is being resisted so much.
skating
Myles
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5162 Posts
August 13 2010 22:50 GMT
#476
On August 14 2010 07:49 huameng wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:44 johnlee wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:36 sadyque wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:31 johnlee wrote:
Here's an excerpt from a book No One Owns You by Andrew Knight, which pretty much sums up how I feel about this:
+ Show Spoiler +

"There is, in my opinion, nothing inherently wrong, vulgar, violent, or indecent about any language, including profanity. Words are just fucking words. Without doubt, they can be used (in conjunction with raised voices and aggressive body language) to intimidate and verbally abuse others. However, the mere use of these words to communicate is not, per se, violent. So what might a Libertarian say about a hypersensitive Puritan woman who is stuck in the same room with a man who honed his vocabulary in a federal penitentiary? Assume that the man has no intention of being violent but, in speaking naturally, discusses things the Puritan finds acutely objectionable and in a language that makes her want to squeal in disgust.

Let’s make no mistake: the Puritan experiences emotional trauma by the man’s words. In some metaphysical sense, the man’s nonviolent words are causing her pain, but only in conjunction with her hypersensitivity. Who is to blame and what should be done to alleviate the pain?

First, to assign blame here is to assume that someone is acting wrongly. I suggest that neither is wrong. The Puritan woman is merely reacting according to her pre-programming and emotional conditioning, and so is the man. In other words, they are both merely being themselves. Because the man is not being offensively violent to the woman, and also because he is not intending to harm her, the woman has no right to use violence against him in defense. Without an offense, there is no defense. Libertarianism respects the right of every person to be himself and to act, speak, and live freely to the extent that he does not violate the rights of others. The woman’s rights to life, liberty, and property have not been abrogated by the man’s choice of words.

To assert that neither is to blame and that no offensive attack has occurred is not to invalidate the woman’s feelings. Indeed, she does feel pain (of discomfort, at the very least) and she is not to blame for having these feelings. However, she is responsible for them. She must be held accountable for the ease with which she feels pain. A hypersensitive person cannot expect the world’s inhabitants to tiptoe around her in constant fear that she will be disturbed by the sounds of their footfall. People are people. Sometimes they’re loud. Sometimes they’re obnoxious. Sometimes they get in our way. But we share this tiny planet with several billion of them. To require every person to conform to our individual standards of comfort or morality would be chaotic as there are several billion such standards – one for each person. But to let people be themselves, to accept and understand even if we don’t agree – that is the recipe for peace and tranquility.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is the woman’s responsibility to either leave the room or to learn to accept the man for who he is. The woman’s pain – a very real and understandable pain – is nonetheless her problem, not his. To hold otherwise would be to allow the world to be controlled by the most hypersensitive people. I say: let them be sensitive. Let them take offense. Let them be perpetually annoyed, bothered, angry, and judgemental. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to be the free, unhindered, joyful child that I am. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue to live without artificial constraints, respecting the rights of others to live freely, and with little concern as to who may find me offensive, rude, or socially inept.
To require every person to stay in his own space, to tread lightly, to speak softly, to conform to the hypersensitive person’s arbitrary standards and notions of decency is to blame every person for his very existence. Humans are creatures of nature. Neither the Victorian Era nor the Industrial Revolution changed the fact that we are all, fundamentally, children. Children are loud, cantankerous, silly, rude animals and they neither understand nor fully obey societal rules. On the other hand, to set a very high threshold for discomfort – to let the people around you be themselves without your resorting to anger, judgement, or criticism – is one of the kindest gifts you can bestow on the world. You can meaningfully contribute to humanity by accepting others as they are and decreasing your sensitivity to their differing opinions and ways of life.

The Puritan woman need not like the man, nor is she required to engage in conversation with him. But he has not offensively attacked her and, therefore, she has no defensive recourse. She has three options: a) continue to experience pain; b) leave the room; or c) learn to accept the man as he is, reduce her sensitivities, and increase her pain threshold. Of course, option a) seems unwise and option b) will doom the woman to isolation and loneliness. After all, we’ve all known lonely elderly folks stuck in retirement homes whom few will visit for fear of their judgements, hypersensitivity, and manipulation. Arguably, the woman’s best option is c): she has the power to accept the man as he is. She need not feel pain when surrounded by people who look differently, speak differently, and have different priorities than she does.

I believe that it is every person’s responsibility, both for his own happiness as well as that of the world’s populace, to shed his sensitivities and artificial dictates about how others “should” act, speak, dress, and live. The Puritan woman may feel a very real discomfort to which we can all empathize, but that is her problem to solve. To allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards."


Erm so your point is that if we allow a woman who was raped to have a problem with that then we " allow her to push her insecurities and discomforts on others is to allow the world to be ruled by fear, prejudice, hatred, and the psychological constraints imposed by cowards"+ Show Spoiler +


Yep. If we let a woman who was raped push onto us HER issues with the way WE use the word, then we definitely a problem.
I'm not okay-ing the fact that woman was raped. I'm saying that the fact that she is trying to use her rape experiences (which was clearly unfortunate) to disallow a gaming community or anything else for that matter from using the word, is wrong when it's clear that we are not using the word rape in the sense that she experienced.

It's as simple as that.


Would it be incorrect to sum up your views as "I don't care one iota about you, deal with it"?


I think it would be better stated 'if I'm not intentionally insulting you, get over it'
Moderator
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France7884 Posts
August 13 2010 22:53 GMT
#477
On August 14 2010 07:34 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:26 revy wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:23 PanN wrote:
The English language is constantly evolving, not always for the best, but it is. A word like "rape" shouldn't be offensive when used in the terms of owning someone etc in a videogame, because thats what that word means in that setting. Multiple other examples but whatever.


This.

I can understand this argument, but why don't sports casters ever use words like retarded or gay? Are gamers less mature than sports fans? No, but the word was able to slip by because of the low restrictions we've had on online speech.

I doubt we can remove words like "gay" used as "stupid" from everyday vernacular, but commentators at least, should not use them.


Anyways, I find how this thread has grown kind of sad too, I'd rather some more entertaining thread were growing like this. I liked coming by TL to chill.

We don't use the word gay because there is nothing wrong about being gay.

We use the word rape because you are still talking about something really nasty which happens to somebody.

Same way that when you say "shit" you use something which has a very negative connotation already. If you were saying "Oh, Jew!" when something nasty happens to you, I would find it pretty shocking.
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
RinoZerg
Profile Joined May 2008
Australia130 Posts
August 13 2010 22:54 GMT
#478
This is an incredibly emotive issue, and as this thread has proven everyone has an opinion on it. I just wanted to throw in my two cents.

We all agree that the use of the word 'rape' is hurtful and offensive to a fairly broad selection of our society. People defending the word seem to be saying 'It's a different context, a different meaning. If they understood that then they wouldn't be offended'.

I'm not so sure they wouldn't be offended after you explained it and that you have to explain it in the first place says there is an issue.

In the end, if you think using the word in this way is completely inoffensive, call your Mum. Call her right now and say the following: "Hey Mum! I was playing Starcraft 2 and just totally raped the shit out of some random dude! Raped him up and down the map. The most brutal, brutal rape ever witnessed in the history of internet gaming".

Actually lets imagine your opponent had been a girl and for whatever reason you had known that. Imagine saying the above but replace 'him' with 'her'. It's completely inoffensive, has a totally different context right? Doesn't even mean the same thing at all ... but it is not ok to say it. My view
Vei
Profile Joined March 2010
United States2845 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:55:54
August 13 2010 22:54 GMT
#479
On August 14 2010 07:34 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2010 07:26 revy wrote:
On August 14 2010 07:23 PanN wrote:
The English language is constantly evolving, not always for the best, but it is. A word like "rape" shouldn't be offensive when used in the terms of owning someone etc in a videogame, because thats what that word means in that setting. Multiple other examples but whatever.


This.

I can understand this argument, but why don't sports casters ever use words like retarded or gay? Are gamers less mature than sports fans? No, but the word was able to slip by because of the low restrictions we've had on online speech.

I doubt we can remove words like "gay" used as "stupid" from everyday vernacular, but commentators at least, should not use them.


Anyways, I find how this thread has grown kind of sad too, I'd rather some more entertaining thread were growing like this. I liked coming by TL to chill.

Because "gay" is also frequently used by the same football fans to disparage homosexuals. Homosexuality, unlike rape, is a controversial subject that some people feel supportive of, some neutral, and statistically, most people look down on gays. So, a commentator would not use the term "gay" to describe something because it is not 100% accepted to mean "stupid" in most of its uses by its fans. The same tailgating republican Football fan could just as easily go make fun of gay "faggots" after a game.

Contrasting this, gamers all agree that rape sucks and isn't a cool thing (except the .001% who try to act cool or controversial or whatever). When we say we raped someone, we would never shit-talk a rape victim and be like LOL U GOT OWNED. Gamers agree on BOTH meanings of rape: in game context rape is the act of ownage, and outside of games it is a despicable act.

Back to why gay isn't used: gay isn't agreed upon on what its definition is. To liberal, (bias inc) more educated people, gay just means something stupid/lame and has no correlation to sexual orientation AT ALL. To a hick, gay could mean something stupid AND that gay people are stupid. Its definitions in all its contexts are not agreed upon; to some gayness, stupidity, and homosexuality are all the same thing. To others, people would label a 7pool as gay/stupid but never label a homosexual as "stupid" in the same definition of gay.

If you see what I'm trying to say.
www.justin.tv/veisc2 ~ 720p + commentary
Klamity
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States994 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-08-13 22:59:07
August 13 2010 22:56 GMT
#480
I try to avoid saying faggot, but am completely guilty of using the word rape. Rape, I guess unfortunately, has multiple meanings now. I guess you could argue that for faggot as well, but if you aren't going to run around screaming chink and nigger, then you probably shouldn't say faggot either. Same goes for any other slur like that.
Don't believe in yourself, believe in me, who believes in you.
Prev 1 22 23 24 25 26 33 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
RSL Revival
10:00
Season 1: Playoffs FINALS
Classic vs ClemLIVE!
Tasteless3528
ComeBackTV 1609
Crank 1450
IndyStarCraft 277
Rex150
3DClanTV 108
IntoTheiNu 50
LiquipediaDiscussion
Sparkling Tuna Cup
10:00
Weekly #97
Gerald vs PercivalLIVE!
ByuN vs Nicoract
CranKy Ducklings119
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Tasteless 3528
Crank 1450
IndyStarCraft 277
Rex 150
MindelVK 34
StarCraft: Brood War
Horang2 35583
Jaedong 3776
Pusan 849
BeSt 801
firebathero 636
Larva 584
Mini 493
Leta 220
Last 201
EffOrt 188
[ Show more ]
ToSsGirL 109
Shinee 37
Sharp 34
Hm[arnc] 24
Sea.KH 20
Barracks 17
Icarus 13
yabsab 12
HiyA 12
Noble 11
GoRush 9
SilentControl 9
IntoTheRainbow 9
Movie 9
Dewaltoss 1
Dota 2
Gorgc3585
XcaliburYe464
XaKoH 460
Counter-Strike
x6flipin533
Stewie2K517
edward25
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor347
Other Games
tarik_tv21698
gofns14384
FrodaN4045
singsing1530
B2W.Neo1032
shahzam456
DeMusliM435
crisheroes362
Happy340
KnowMe139
SortOf116
Pyrionflax48
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
lovetv 13
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH263
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2152
• Ler51
Upcoming Events
FEL
3h 27m
Elazer vs Spirit
Gerald vs MaNa
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
6h 27m
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Wardi Open
23h 27m
Replay Cast
1d 22h
WardiTV European League
2 days
PiGosaur Monday
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
Replay Cast
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
Epic.LAN
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
Epic.LAN
6 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
6 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
HSC XXVII
NC Random Cup

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters

Upcoming

CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.