|
|
On September 19 2011 03:19 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:14 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. The insult is based entirely around sex. Bitch means female dog. Dog itself is not an insult (e.g. top dog) so it's the female part of it that makes it an insult. Absolutely incorrect. No one in American culture insults someone because the female dog is the word they are using to describe them. That is a different meaning of the same word that is not an insult and is used separately. You are deriving a sexist insult because you don't realize that in American culture a bitch is either a legitimate term for a female dog or a term for an unpleasant, caustic, or troublesome person. They use terms that mean male dog to praise people They use terms that mean female dog to insult people The fact that female dog is interchangeable with "unpleasant, caustic, or troublesome person" while calling someone a dog is interchangeable with calling someone strong, a leader, knows what he's doing is a problem!
"bitch" isn't an insult because it happens to also refer to a female dog; it simply means an unpleasant person. if i call someone a "bitch", i'm not trying to imply that they have female characteristics.
there are plenty of insults that imply masculinity (take "faggot" for example, one of the most commonly used pejoratives in the gaming world) but i'm not writing articles on how unfair that is to all men. a woman who is insulted by the liberal use of "bitch" among 16-24 year old males needs to get a grip.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:08 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:02 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 02:58 hummingbird23 wrote:On September 19 2011 02:55 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 02:53 hummingbird23 wrote: [quote]
You're painting this as an either/or situation when it isn't. Misogyny exists in gaming culture. This you don't deny. Whether it exists elsewhere is not the point, we're talking about misogyny in gaming culture.
In a budget, you have only so much money to spend. It's a resource allocation exercise in limited resources. In this case, I'm only advocating to avoid using words like 'rape' to denote one player totally outplaying the other. It's not a choice between this and fixing the "really large" problems (which most of the time, you'd be doing by social pressure anyway, unless you're in a position of power relative to the problem). You are definitely correct you don't have a budget of money, but you do have a budget of time, no one has unlimited amounts of time. All I'm saying is that in my opinion it's better to preach at more severe, larger areas of sexism that are more easily fixed. If you disagree then that's fine, I respect your opinion. How is avoiding the use of 'rape' a use of time? Just curious, when you say "more severe, larger areas of [misogyny] that are more easily fixed" (corrected for accuracy), what easily fixed areas are you referring to? I'm saying using your time to convince people that rape (How is this even valid, this is a term that I deem as general as, "murder" in the sense of how it affects the sexes...and if you disagree I'd almost have to say you are sexist, but I digress) is a word that shouldn't be used to describe things other than rape in a game is less effective than actually trying to make a larger difference elsewhere in the real World.. In theory rape is a sexless term because it can happen to any gender by and gender. However the vast majority of rapes happen where it is men raping women. This mean women tend to find it as more of a sexual threat whereas men tend to see at just another insult. Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that.
An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female.
I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker.
|
On September 19 2011 03:28 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. Wait what??!?!?!!? You can say sexist things, but not be sexist? If you're saying sexist things, by definition are you not being sexist? My point is that, especially in this case, you have to personally make a word sexist and give it a gender before it becomes sexist.
Bitch and cock should not have a gender attached to them as insults just because historically they describe animals of a certain sex.
|
On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:08 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:02 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 02:58 hummingbird23 wrote:On September 19 2011 02:55 HereticSaint wrote: [quote]
You are definitely correct you don't have a budget of money, but you do have a budget of time, no one has unlimited amounts of time. All I'm saying is that in my opinion it's better to preach at more severe, larger areas of sexism that are more easily fixed. If you disagree then that's fine, I respect your opinion.
How is avoiding the use of 'rape' a use of time? Just curious, when you say "more severe, larger areas of [misogyny] that are more easily fixed" (corrected for accuracy), what easily fixed areas are you referring to? I'm saying using your time to convince people that rape (How is this even valid, this is a term that I deem as general as, "murder" in the sense of how it affects the sexes...and if you disagree I'd almost have to say you are sexist, but I digress) is a word that shouldn't be used to describe things other than rape in a game is less effective than actually trying to make a larger difference elsewhere in the real World.. In theory rape is a sexless term because it can happen to any gender by and gender. However the vast majority of rapes happen where it is men raping women. This mean women tend to find it as more of a sexual threat whereas men tend to see at just another insult. Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker.
66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person.
Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY?
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:34 Percutio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:28 lorkac wrote:On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. Wait what??!?!?!!? You can say sexist things, but not be sexist? If you're saying sexist things, by definition are you not being sexist? My point is that, especially in this case, you have to personally make a word sexist and give it a gender before it becomes sexist. Bitch and cock should not have a gender attached to them as insults just because historically they describe animals of a certain sex.
They don't have to have a gender attached to them but they do. Just because the meaning has changed doesn't necessarily mean that that old meaning completely disappears from the word, it still remains as an implication. This is especially the case when the older use of the word is still in use.
|
On September 19 2011 03:37 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:34 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 lorkac wrote:On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. Wait what??!?!?!!? You can say sexist things, but not be sexist? If you're saying sexist things, by definition are you not being sexist? My point is that, especially in this case, you have to personally make a word sexist and give it a gender before it becomes sexist. Bitch and cock should not have a gender attached to them as insults just because historically they describe animals of a certain sex. They don't have to have a gender attached to them but they do. Just because the meaning has changed doesn't necessarily mean that that old meaning completely disappears from the word, it still remains as an implication. This is especially the case when the older use of the word is still in use. They do for some people which is also important and which is why people can and do think that these terms are sexist. Others have moved on and do not relate the two words as one is an insult and the other is an old meaning. The link does not exist for some people and I dare say most people.
Goes back to the point where this is one of the cases where the listener is putting a gender meaning to the word. It also isn't a case where people who normally don't consider the word to be gendered suddenly feel it is, if it was then I think there would be a stronger case for it to be considered sexist.
As of right now I can only imagine it being considered sexist if someone believes that bitch is a sexist term, which is fine. However, I hope someone that conservative with language also believes cock is sexist.
On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:
An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female.
I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker.
Ok, I'm not an expert on the subject, but I just had to be trained in this so it should be fresh in my mind.
Males don't necessarily rape females because they are female. Usually there are other factors that cause someone to rape another person. This is weakly supported by the fact that most male on male rapes are not committed by gay men.
Again excuse me if that is off but I had forced training on that like a month ago.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:08 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:02 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 02:58 hummingbird23 wrote: [quote]
How is avoiding the use of 'rape' a use of time? Just curious, when you say "more severe, larger areas of [misogyny] that are more easily fixed" (corrected for accuracy), what easily fixed areas are you referring to? I'm saying using your time to convince people that rape (How is this even valid, this is a term that I deem as general as, "murder" in the sense of how it affects the sexes...and if you disagree I'd almost have to say you are sexist, but I digress) is a word that shouldn't be used to describe things other than rape in a game is less effective than actually trying to make a larger difference elsewhere in the real World.. In theory rape is a sexless term because it can happen to any gender by and gender. However the vast majority of rapes happen where it is men raping women. This mean women tend to find it as more of a sexual threat whereas men tend to see at just another insult. Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY?
The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in.
|
i like how people qoute wrongly just to make a stupid article more interesting
|
Canada11607 Posts
Ugh, not sure if I want to wade back in.
One thing with the definitions issue seems to be this either/or thing. So rape has the meaning of sexually violating someone (and in societal context, this is most often towards women.) And it has developed the meaning of destroying someone in a game (in gaming subculture.) The same perhaps would go with some of the other words.
Like the top two insults. I am quite obviously safe in believing that neither of them are going to go out and rape someone.
On September 19 2011 02:17 Haemonculus wrote: Phrases I've heard in vent during some LoL playing just in the last 15 minutes:
"He's coming mid to rape you" "gonna rape the shit out of..." "smack a bitch, smack smack smack a bitch" "fuck this pussy bitch up"
zzzzz
So we havesome people arguing, I'm just picking the non-offensive part of the word. It's your problem if you pick the other ones. The problem is, none of these words have changed like 'gai' as in happy to 'gay' as in homosexual so that the former word no longer exists. In all these words being thrown around, the other word's meanings are wrapped up in the same word. You might be picking and choosing, but as soon as that word is spoken, if you've grown up in the dominant society you know all the meanings attached to the word. They can't be separated as they all exist at the same time.
And part of the reason those word became insults in the first place is a very deep-seated belief in women inferiority. Now it's just par for the course and very few people believe that women are inferior (Please understand what I just said. I highly doubt anyone in this thread actually feels women are inferior), but we continue to use the same words that have somewhat gained a new meaning, but still carry the old baggage at the same time.
And yeah, women are probably going to be more sensitive to how those words. Not all, but many. Because it was used against them, simply for being women. That's why the nigger example keeps being brought up. That word was an implicit attack on black simply for being black and carried all sort of negative meaning. The word has developed somewhat so amongst their own ethnic group, it carries another meaning, but the old meaning is still present and if a white person. Watch out if a white person uses that word- it's because they came from the dominant culture/ were part of the primary discourse.
It's for the same reason that it's easy for men to say insults targeting women for being women is not a big deal. We came from the dominant culture and were part of the primary discourse. No we don't need to step on egg-shells all day in a sense of guilt for past misdeeds. But if someone from a secondary discourse has an issue with what we're saying, maybe it would behoove us to listen? Because they are far more in touch with what the weight those words carry because it was directed against them. Of course these things are not going to phase us, it was never directed against us in the same way.
Edit And not because we're sexist and need to stop being sexist, but like Chiffon said if they are expressing concern about our word usage? If yes, do we want to be more welcoming rather than holding on to our right to certain phrases?
The last two quoted insults Haem saw, I fail to see how they can be interpreted as anything but sexist insults. (Smack your woman for the third at least.)
On September 19 2011 02:17 Haemonculus wrote: Phrases I've heard in vent during some LoL playing just in the last 15 minutes:
"He's coming mid to rape you" "gonna rape the shit out of..." "smack a bitch, smack smack smack a bitch" "fuck this pussy bitch up"
zzzzz
Oh, and I totally called like 10 to 15 pages back that the Steve Hughes video would be quoted. Never fails.
|
On September 19 2011 03:42 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:08 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:02 HereticSaint wrote: [quote]
I'm saying using your time to convince people that rape (How is this even valid, this is a term that I deem as general as, "murder" in the sense of how it affects the sexes...and if you disagree I'd almost have to say you are sexist, but I digress) is a word that shouldn't be used to describe things other than rape in a game is less effective than actually trying to make a larger difference elsewhere in the real World.. In theory rape is a sexless term because it can happen to any gender by and gender. However the vast majority of rapes happen where it is men raping women. This mean women tend to find it as more of a sexual threat whereas men tend to see at just another insult. Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY? The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in.
America's prison population topped 2 million inmates for the first time in history on June 30, 2002 according to a new report from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
The 50 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government held 1,355,748 prisoners (two-thirds of the total incarcerated population), and local municipal and county jails held 665,475 inmates.
By midyear 2002, America's jails held 1 in every 142 U.S. residents. Males were incarcerated at the rate of 1,309 inmates per 100,000 U.S. men, while the female incarceration rate was 113 per 100,000 women residents.
Source: Source
Several studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, might be the most common and least-reported forms of rape, with some studies suggesting such rapes are substantially more common in both per-capita and raw-number totals than male-female rapes in the general population.[2][15][16]
Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child.[17] This does not take into account the possibility of exaggeration or false reports nor of underreporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995.
Male on male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma men associate with being raped by other men. According to psychologist Dr Sarah Crome fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill equipped to deal with this type of crime.[18]
The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.[19]
Statutory female-on-male rape
Several widely publicized cases of female-on-male statutory rape in the United States involved school teachers raping their underage students. (See e.g. Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Lafave)
In the case of statutory rape, the victim can be legally bound to pay child support to his rapist.[20] [edit] Non-statutory female-on-male rape
Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent mentally or physically for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through use of a strap-on or other object. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways.
However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain. Due to these reasons, it is likely being substantially under-reported, with the probable cause being the double standard, or possibly shame.[27]
So, we learned that the most common form of rape is prison rape and it's generally unreported and that a majority of prisoners are male. Therefore we can deduce that a majority of rape is male on male rape and on the rare chance it's female on male rape and the female becomes pregnant the male can be at least in certain cases expected to pay child support. If anything overall rape seems much scarier to me, as a male.
Edit: Cleaned it up a bit.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:37 Percutio wrote: Ok, I'm not an expert on the subject, but I just had to be trained in this so it should be fresh in my mind.
Males don't necessarily rape females because they are female. Usually there are other factors that cause someone to rape another person. This is weakly supported by the fact that most male on male rapes are not committed by gay men.
Again excuse me if that is off but I had forced training on that like a month ago.
There are indeed other factors in rape than just male/female. The main one I think is basically having power over another person, this is where most homosexual prison rapes comes from for example. The thing is in the majority of the cases it's men exerting their perceived power over women.
|
It's real simple, people.
Take "sexism" out of it. It doesn't matter. No one is sexist now. Ok? Good.
Do you want more females around? If yes, try to be more mindful of the things you say. If no, keep doing what you're doing.
If you want a community to open up to cultural diversity, not pushing them away with your ugly language is a good place to start. It's offensive. It doesn't matter if *you* think it's offensive. "They" do. And "they" aren't going to want to be around you when you're offending them. "They will go do something else.
That's all there is. Plain. Simple. Real.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:46 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:42 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:08 imallinson wrote: [quote]
In theory rape is a sexless term because it can happen to any gender by and gender. However the vast majority of rapes happen where it is men raping women. This mean women tend to find it as more of a sexual threat whereas men tend to see at just another insult. Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY? The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in. America's prison population topped 2 million inmates for the first time in history on June 30, 2002 according to a new report from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The 50 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government held 1,355,748 prisoners (two-thirds of the total incarcerated population), and local municipal and county jails held 665,475 inmates. By midyear 2002, America's jails held 1 in every 142 U.S. residents. Males were incarcerated at the rate of 1,309 inmates per 100,000 U.S. men, while the female incarceration rate was 113 per 100,000 women residents. Source: SourceSeveral studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, might be the most common and least-reported forms of rape, with some studies suggesting such rapes are substantially more common in both per-capita and raw-number totals than male-female rapes in the general population.[2][15][16] Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child.[17] This does not take into account the possibility of exaggeration or false reports nor of underreporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995. Male on male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma men associate with being raped by other men. According to psychologist Dr Sarah Crome fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill equipped to deal with this type of crime.[18] The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.[19] Statutory female-on-male rape Several widely publicized cases of female-on-male statutory rape in the United States involved school teachers raping their underage students. (See e.g. Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Lafave) In the case of statutory rape, the victim can be legally bound to pay child support to his rapist.[20] [edit] Non-statutory female-on-male rape Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent mentally or physically for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through use of a strap-on or other object. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways. However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain. Due to these reasons, it is likely being substantially under-reported, with the probable cause being the double standard, or possibly shame.[27] So, we learned that the most common form of rape is prison rape and it's generally unreported and that a majority of prisoners are male. Therefore we can deduce that a majority of rape is male on male rape. GG.
I'm more talking about the general population, seeing as gamers belong to that group. Prisons will skew the results quite a bit because the type of people who go into prisons are more likely to rape people and also that prisons are completely gendered institutions so men have no chance to rape women.
|
On September 19 2011 03:49 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:37 Percutio wrote: Ok, I'm not an expert on the subject, but I just had to be trained in this so it should be fresh in my mind.
Males don't necessarily rape females because they are female. Usually there are other factors that cause someone to rape another person. This is weakly supported by the fact that most male on male rapes are not committed by gay men.
Again excuse me if that is off but I had forced training on that like a month ago. There are indeed other factors in rape than just male/female. The main one I think is basically having power over another person, this is where most homosexual prison rapes comes from for example. The thing is in the majority of the cases it's men exerting their perceived power over women. Yeah makes sense, of course some men will rape a woman because they actually do want to feel power specifically over a woman and not just any person. This obviously happens. I just wanted to point out that it isn't always the case and that is just one cause/reason among the many that exist among rape cases.
|
there are plenty of insults that imply masculinity (take "faggot" for example, one of the most commonly used pejoratives in the gaming world) but i'm not writing articles on how unfair that is to all men. a woman who is insulted by the liberal use of "bitch" among 16-24 year old males needs to get a grip.
Faggot is actually an attack on femininity.
It is looking down at a male for not wanting to subjugate and conquer a female. Because it is understood that a male who does not wish to conquer a female and is weak. In the zeitgheist of society, the only group of people that should want to be dominated sexually by men are female.
This is so much so that the people who are attacked the most for being faggots are flamboyant individuals who act more feminine than males are allowed to by society. The term is used so often a large section of society is able to comfortably use the word faggot to mean weak--but what they really mean is feminine.
|
On September 19 2011 03:52 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:46 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:42 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 HereticSaint wrote: [quote]
Here we go again. Sorry, I don't buy the, "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology and would literally rebel against a government enforcing those ideals if it were trying to rule over me, I'm 100% not even kidding. Killing isn't all of a sudden a term that has more meaning towards males because they kill other people (mostly males) more often. It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war. Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY? The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in. America's prison population topped 2 million inmates for the first time in history on June 30, 2002 according to a new report from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The 50 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government held 1,355,748 prisoners (two-thirds of the total incarcerated population), and local municipal and county jails held 665,475 inmates. By midyear 2002, America's jails held 1 in every 142 U.S. residents. Males were incarcerated at the rate of 1,309 inmates per 100,000 U.S. men, while the female incarceration rate was 113 per 100,000 women residents. Source: SourceSeveral studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, might be the most common and least-reported forms of rape, with some studies suggesting such rapes are substantially more common in both per-capita and raw-number totals than male-female rapes in the general population.[2][15][16] Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child.[17] This does not take into account the possibility of exaggeration or false reports nor of underreporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995. Male on male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma men associate with being raped by other men. According to psychologist Dr Sarah Crome fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill equipped to deal with this type of crime.[18] The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.[19] Statutory female-on-male rape Several widely publicized cases of female-on-male statutory rape in the United States involved school teachers raping their underage students. (See e.g. Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Lafave) In the case of statutory rape, the victim can be legally bound to pay child support to his rapist.[20] [edit] Non-statutory female-on-male rape Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent mentally or physically for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through use of a strap-on or other object. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways. However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain. Due to these reasons, it is likely being substantially under-reported, with the probable cause being the double standard, or possibly shame.[27] So, we learned that the most common form of rape is prison rape and it's generally unreported and that a majority of prisoners are male. Therefore we can deduce that a majority of rape is male on male rape. GG. I'm more talking about the general population, seeing as gamers belong to that group. Prisons will skew the results quite a bit because the type of people who go into prisons are more likely to rape people and also that prisons are completely gendered institutions so men have no chance to rape women.
There's literally no point interacting with you. You make analogies based on nations when we are talking about sexism, you say murder is neutral gender, when it isn't and I give you statistics that show otherwise. You hang on the fact that rape is something that happens to females more when it isn't, WHY it happens to males more or is more traumatic/damaging doesn't matter, it does and is.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:55 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:52 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:46 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:42 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:16 imallinson wrote: [quote]
It's not a "I'm a woman, I'm the victim always" ideology at all. It's saying that because most rapes happen to women by men, it has considerably more meaning to women than men. It's a similar situation to say two nations who have been warring and a member of one nation says to another in a competitive game "I'm going to kill you" it will have a much stronger effect on that person than someone from another country, even if that particular person was in no way involved in the war.
Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit. The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY? The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in. America's prison population topped 2 million inmates for the first time in history on June 30, 2002 according to a new report from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The 50 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government held 1,355,748 prisoners (two-thirds of the total incarcerated population), and local municipal and county jails held 665,475 inmates. By midyear 2002, America's jails held 1 in every 142 U.S. residents. Males were incarcerated at the rate of 1,309 inmates per 100,000 U.S. men, while the female incarceration rate was 113 per 100,000 women residents. Source: SourceSeveral studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, might be the most common and least-reported forms of rape, with some studies suggesting such rapes are substantially more common in both per-capita and raw-number totals than male-female rapes in the general population.[2][15][16] Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child.[17] This does not take into account the possibility of exaggeration or false reports nor of underreporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995. Male on male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma men associate with being raped by other men. According to psychologist Dr Sarah Crome fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill equipped to deal with this type of crime.[18] The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.[19] Statutory female-on-male rape Several widely publicized cases of female-on-male statutory rape in the United States involved school teachers raping their underage students. (See e.g. Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Lafave) In the case of statutory rape, the victim can be legally bound to pay child support to his rapist.[20] [edit] Non-statutory female-on-male rape Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent mentally or physically for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through use of a strap-on or other object. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways. However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain. Due to these reasons, it is likely being substantially under-reported, with the probable cause being the double standard, or possibly shame.[27] So, we learned that the most common form of rape is prison rape and it's generally unreported and that a majority of prisoners are male. Therefore we can deduce that a majority of rape is male on male rape. GG. I'm more talking about the general population, seeing as gamers belong to that group. Prisons will skew the results quite a bit because the type of people who go into prisons are more likely to rape people and also that prisons are completely gendered institutions so men have no chance to rape women. There's literally no point interacting with you. You make analogies based on nations when we are talking about sexism, you say murder is neutral gender, when it isn't and I give you statistics that show otherwise. You hang on the fact that rape is something that happens to females more when it isn't, WHY it happens to males more or is more traumatic/damaging doesn't matter, it does.
The analogy about nations was just that, an analogy, there isn't any reason to attack it like it was my main point. I'm saying murder isn't gender oriented (i.e. people murder people because of circumstance not on their gender). In the general public rape is something that happens more to females by males (also because they are female not just circumstance) and prisons skew the data if included because they are gendered institutions. So males walking down the street will be much less worried about being raped than females walking down the street.
|
On September 19 2011 03:55 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +there are plenty of insults that imply masculinity (take "faggot" for example, one of the most commonly used pejoratives in the gaming world) but i'm not writing articles on how unfair that is to all men. a woman who is insulted by the liberal use of "bitch" among 16-24 year old males needs to get a grip.
Faggot is actually an attack on femininity. It is looking down at a male for not wanting to subjugate and conquer a female. Because it is understood that a male who does not wish to conquer a female and is weak. In the zeitgheist of society, the only group of people that should want to be dominated sexually by men are female. This is so much so that the people who are attacked the most for being faggots are flamboyant individuals who act more feminine than males are allowed to by society. The term is used so often a large section of society is able to comfortably use the word faggot to mean weak--but what they really mean is feminine. Femininity in males not in general.
Dike works in reverse in a sense. Looks down upon masculinity in females. Although becoming more socially acceptable it isn't hard to see how society would find a way to criticize those who go against traditional gender roles.
|
On September 19 2011 04:01 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:55 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:52 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:46 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:42 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:35 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:33 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 19 2011 03:23 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:18 HereticSaint wrote: [quote]
Wait, so we jumped from sexes to nations? No, I'm sorry you literally contradicted yourself in the same post that is only a few sentences long. It's like saying men should immediately be more offended when another male says they are going to murder them because it's more likely to happen. That's bullshit.
The nations thing was just to try and explain my point. More simply if Group A does something bad to Group B. Then Person A saying something related to that bad thing is going to offend Person B more than another member of Group A or someone in neither group. Also murder is much more of a gender neutral crime than rape. Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male Male offender/Male victim 65.2% Male offender/Female victim 22.6% Female offender/Male victim 9.7% Female offender/Female victim 2.4% The gender distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2004 combined - * Among all homicide victims, females are particularly at risk for intimate killings and sex-related homicides. Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004 Victims Offenders Male Female Male Female All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3% Victim/offender relationship Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7% Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4% Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2% Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7% Circumstances Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7% Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4% Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4% Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7% Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5% Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9% Weapon Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8% Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9% Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7% Multiple victims or offenders Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5% Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3% Also, I know exactly what you were doing, you were talking about genders in one line and in the next you moved it to nations. You can't swap it around like that. An I'm sure the numbers for rape are much more gendered. Also as has been said before males don't murder other males because they are males whereas males rape females because they are female. I didn't try to swap it round, I was trying to use a neutral, to this discussion, subject to explain my point better I could have used anything it's just warring nations was the first thing that popped into my head. There isn't anything specific about nations that makes my point stronger or weaker. 66% isn't enough for you. Can you tell me, oh lord and master of the universe at what percentage should murder begin to effect me as a male. At first I thought you were reasonable, but now you come off just as bad as that other person. Also, males don't murder other males because they are males? REALLY? The numbers aren't the most important thing, the intent is. Yes I doubt that happens much. Say for example gun homicide which is 83% male/male. these killing aren't because they are male, it's probably down to gang violence being mainly perpetrated by males. If you look at say murders where it is an intimate relation ship the numbers are much more skewed towards male/female in both directions, this is because there a lot more heterosexual couples. All these murder rates are very circumstantial to the condition they are being perpetrated in. America's prison population topped 2 million inmates for the first time in history on June 30, 2002 according to a new report from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The 50 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government held 1,355,748 prisoners (two-thirds of the total incarcerated population), and local municipal and county jails held 665,475 inmates. By midyear 2002, America's jails held 1 in every 142 U.S. residents. Males were incarcerated at the rate of 1,309 inmates per 100,000 U.S. men, while the female incarceration rate was 113 per 100,000 women residents. Source: SourceSeveral studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, might be the most common and least-reported forms of rape, with some studies suggesting such rapes are substantially more common in both per-capita and raw-number totals than male-female rapes in the general population.[2][15][16] Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child.[17] This does not take into account the possibility of exaggeration or false reports nor of underreporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995. Male on male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma men associate with being raped by other men. According to psychologist Dr Sarah Crome fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill equipped to deal with this type of crime.[18] The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.[19] Statutory female-on-male rape Several widely publicized cases of female-on-male statutory rape in the United States involved school teachers raping their underage students. (See e.g. Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Lafave) In the case of statutory rape, the victim can be legally bound to pay child support to his rapist.[20] [edit] Non-statutory female-on-male rape Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent mentally or physically for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through use of a strap-on or other object. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways. However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain. Due to these reasons, it is likely being substantially under-reported, with the probable cause being the double standard, or possibly shame.[27] So, we learned that the most common form of rape is prison rape and it's generally unreported and that a majority of prisoners are male. Therefore we can deduce that a majority of rape is male on male rape. GG. I'm more talking about the general population, seeing as gamers belong to that group. Prisons will skew the results quite a bit because the type of people who go into prisons are more likely to rape people and also that prisons are completely gendered institutions so men have no chance to rape women. There's literally no point interacting with you. You make analogies based on nations when we are talking about sexism, you say murder is neutral gender, when it isn't and I give you statistics that show otherwise. You hang on the fact that rape is something that happens to females more when it isn't, WHY it happens to males more or is more traumatic/damaging doesn't matter, it does. The analogy about nations was just that, an analogy, there isn't any reason to attack it like it was my main point. I'm saying murder isn't gender oriented (i.e. people murder people because of circumstance not on their gender). In the general public rape is something that happens more to females by males (also because they are female not just circumstance) and prisons skew the data if included because they are gendered institutions. So males walking down the street will be much less worried about being raped than females walking down the street.
A man is much more likely to murder another man over a small confrontation than a woman, that's a fact, I'd get you a study but you seem to not give a **** about them. So only the parts of society you want to matter do? So we are only allowed to address rape as per how it would work in your theoretical society? Male on male rape outside of prison as also far less reported and prisoners aren't in prison for ever, the damaging effects of rape maintain in effect when they are released.
|
On September 19 2011 03:31 Percutio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:19 lorkac wrote:On September 19 2011 03:14 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:10 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. The insult is based entirely around sex. Bitch means female dog. Dog itself is not an insult (e.g. top dog) so it's the female part of it that makes it an insult. Absolutely incorrect. No one in American culture insults someone because the female dog is the word they are using to describe them. That is a different meaning of the same word that is not an insult and is used separately. You are deriving a sexist insult because you don't realize that in American culture a bitch is either a legitimate term for a female dog or a term for an unpleasant, caustic, or troublesome person. They use terms that mean male dog to praise people They use terms that mean female dog to insult people The fact that female dog is interchangeable with "unpleasant, caustic, or troublesome person" while calling someone a dog is interchangeable with calling someone strong, a leader, knows what he's doing is a problem! To be fair you could separate the term bitch into two separate words and your argument would devolve. The fact that is used to be used for female dog and now means something else is more of a quirk of the language than a direct correlation especially considering the meaning difference. Dog is not a term for male dog, it is the term for the animal in general. Not sure how you figure it only refers to men, because it doesn't. Secondly, dog as a praising phrase still insults some people and only recently has become popular to express loyalty and unity. The word dog means that, not male or female attached to dog. You can also insult someone by calling them your dog as in they are less than you, a pet, or something similar. That is gender neutral and had a different insult attached to it than bitch, something that female dog simply doesn't imply or even relate to. I will not compare racial terms to supposed sexist or misogynistic terms because they are not the same. However, the word cock is a close example. If you call someone a cock they are usually being mean or idiotic. Cock also means rooster. This does not mean that cock is insulting because you are being called a male chicken instead of just a chicken. Being called a cock has an entirely different meaning from being called a chicken.
Dog is actually a term for a male dog. It's why bitch is the term for a female dog. However, we as a society live in a culture where masculine is the norm. The assumption is that the thing is male unless otherwise specified.
On September 19 2011 03:34 Percutio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 03:28 lorkac wrote:On September 19 2011 03:06 Percutio wrote:On September 19 2011 03:04 imallinson wrote:On September 19 2011 02:59 Percutio wrote: Could he have insulted someone? Absolutely. Could he have insulted someone due to their sex? Of course. Was it sexist? No.
That is exactly what sexism is: sex·ism noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. Absolutely, as soon as the individual places the weight of sex on the word. Which is 100% individual when the person who said it can't imply that it was because of someone's sex. Which is exactly this case. You have to externally make it sexist in your eyes and no one can derive that for you. Wait what??!?!?!!? You can say sexist things, but not be sexist? If you're saying sexist things, by definition are you not being sexist? My point is that, especially in this case, you have to personally make a word sexist and give it a gender before it becomes sexist. Bitch and cock should not have a gender attached to them as insults just because historically they describe animals of a certain sex.
cock is very much gendered.
The one dominated by cock is weak (cocksucker).
Cock is very much a male term normally used to describe someone who is dominating the situation in an unwanted manner. (Cocky, for example)
|
|
|
|
|
|