And inc didn't make good arguments. He kept hammering the same line over and over again about catering to the 0.00001% of the population that is always on the lookout for a reason to become angry and refuses to accept any explanation than their own subjectively construed reality as absolute truth (It doesn't matter that you didn't mean it that way. In my dictionary that word is offensive and carries a set objective meaning), while Destiny argued against them. The only way inc rebuted Destiny (and Wheats) arguments were "I see what you did there", "(condescending laughter) I can't believe I'm hearing this" and "are you serious?!".
Uh, not really. Incontrol rebutted the context argument repeatedly, while Destiny responded only by repeating himself about context and making vague statements about transparency and sincerity. It's funny that you only said "Destiny argued against them" without elaborating. You clearly only heard what you wanted to hear.
I'm usually a iNcontrol fanboy and I hadn't ever heard about Destiny before I watched Live on Three yesterday, so I can't identify with you saying I went into this biased. I usually think iNcontrol is very eloquent and makes good arguments, but last night I was pretty shocked listening to him. I really didn't know whether to take him serious or if he was trolling. I don't think Destiny's statements about transparency and sincerity were vague at all. He kept comming with rational arguments and examples illustrating his point, and all iNcontrol was doing was acting outraged, flabergasted and condescending.
Since you're only speaking in generalities about the show, I'm gonna provide some specific excerpts that fly in the face of that bolded sentence.
Destiny: I think it's an insult to black people who were disparaged in the United States when somebody today claims the same offensiveness to a word that those people did earlier and tries to identify with that group of people...
Inctontrol: Part of the reason why it's not your place to deem their exerience with their race and racism as offensive or legitimate is because you're not walking in their shoes...If a person does experience racism and they have a good job, it's not like they get to channel the exact rage and discomfort of the 1950s in order for them to identify with that term being offensive.
Destiny: Honestly you can't believe that the word nigger carries teh same implications today as it did 50 years ago.
Incontrol: I think it's shallow to say that because your context of how you used it is inoffensive from your perspective, that for their context for it to also be inoffensive for them too because you didn't mean it that way.
Destiny: It's impossible to curtail your individual message to make sure that you don't offend any person out of a group of potentially millions of listeners.
Incontrol: Of course when I talk about the sun, some people are going to have a problem because their dad died of skin cancer...but when there's a word that we talk about, you know about, you've read in history, you've been educated....that carries a certain heavy heavy weight.
So yeah....when you say "The only way inc rebuted Destiny (and Wheats) arguments were "I see what you did there", "(condescending laughter) I can't believe I'm hearing this...", you're wrong.
a) "Part of the reason why it's not your place to deem their exerience with their race and racism as offensive or legitimate is because you're not walking in their shoes..." Incontrol should applye the same logic to Incontrol. Who made him the representative of the anti-racist league ?
b)"I think it's shallow to say that because your context of how you used it is inoffensive from your perspective...." That's the interesting part of the discussion but a) Destiny is not the one calling other people shallow just because they disagree from the very start and b) he's not the one telling other people what words they should or should not use (seems many people think they have a monopoly on this) ; if Incontrol had a solid list of words that shouldn't be used and could motivate why derogatory word "x" should be banned, when derogatory "y" should be ok-ed, he should have come with it. But to say "there's 2 words...wait no there's 4" (we're lucky the show was short, god knows how many would have suffered the ban hammer) just sounded silly and improvised.
c)"Of course when I talk about the sun...." Did he impersonate a dancing indian saying this ?
He did not have much of a point really, but he sure knows how to sound condescending, that's always helpful in an argument.
eurelastreet why are you so fanaticly defending destiny? Incontrol was right in that argument, almost everyone else can see it, but you insist on defending destiny, almost blindly. He's saying that destiny can't say its not offensive to anyone because of how he uses it, which is true. Have destiny go to downtown new yowrk and start saying nigger loudly and have him try to explain that it shouldn't be offensive because of how he uses it. You go and try to turn that argument around by saying "but incontrols calling him shallow!" Yeah he is,and he's right. It's quite shallow to say that "because of how i use this word it's now not offensive to people" And no he did not impersonate a dancing india nsaying when he talks about the sun, that's again your imagination making him out to be the bad guy because of how much you like destiny.
And inc didn't make good arguments. He kept hammering the same line over and over again about catering to the 0.00001% of the population that is always on the lookout for a reason to become angry and refuses to accept any explanation than their own subjectively construed reality as absolute truth (It doesn't matter that you didn't mean it that way. In my dictionary that word is offensive and carries a set objective meaning), while Destiny argued against them. The only way inc rebuted Destiny (and Wheats) arguments were "I see what you did there", "(condescending laughter) I can't believe I'm hearing this" and "are you serious?!".
Uh, not really. Incontrol rebutted the context argument repeatedly, while Destiny responded only by repeating himself about context and making vague statements about transparency and sincerity. It's funny that you only said "Destiny argued against them" without elaborating. You clearly only heard what you wanted to hear.
I'm usually a iNcontrol fanboy and I hadn't ever heard about Destiny before I watched Live on Three yesterday, so I can't identify with you saying I went into this biased. I usually think iNcontrol is very eloquent and makes good arguments, but last night I was pretty shocked listening to him. I really didn't know whether to take him serious or if he was trolling. I don't think Destiny's statements about transparency and sincerity were vague at all. He kept comming with rational arguments and examples illustrating his point, and all iNcontrol was doing was acting outraged, flabergasted and condescending.
Since you're only speaking in generalities about the show, I'm gonna provide some specific excerpts that fly in the face of that bolded sentence.
Destiny: I think it's an insult to black people who were disparaged in the United States when somebody today claims the same offensiveness to a word that those people did earlier and tries to identify with that group of people...
Inctontrol: Part of the reason why it's not your place to deem their exerience with their race and racism as offensive or legitimate is because you're not walking in their shoes...If a person does experience racism and they have a good job, it's not like they get to channel the exact rage and discomfort of the 1950s in order for them to identify with that term being offensive.
Destiny: Honestly you can't believe that the word nigger carries teh same implications today as it did 50 years ago.
Incontrol: I think it's shallow to say that because your context of how you used it is inoffensive from your perspective, that for their context for it to also be inoffensive for them too because you didn't mean it that way.
Destiny: It's impossible to curtail your individual message to make sure that you don't offend any person out of a group of potentially millions of listeners.
Incontrol: Of course when I talk about the sun, some people are going to have a problem because their dad died of skin cancer...but when there's a word that we talk about, you know about, you've read in history, you've been educated....that carries a certain heavy heavy weight.
So yeah....when you say "The only way inc rebuted Destiny (and Wheats) arguments were "I see what you did there", "(condescending laughter) I can't believe I'm hearing this...", you're wrong.
a) "Part of the reason why it's not your place to deem their exerience with their race and racism as offensive or legitimate is because you're not walking in their shoes..." Incontrol should applye the same logic to Incontrol. Who made him the representative of the anti-racist league ?
b)"I think it's shallow to say that because your context of how you used it is inoffensive from your perspective...." That's the interesting part of the discussion but a) Destiny is not the one calling other people shallow just because they disagree from the very start and b) he's not the one telling other people what words they should or should not use (seems many people think they have a monopoly on this) ; if Incontrol had a solid list of words that shouldn't be used and could motivate why derogatory word "x" should be banned, when derogatory "y" should be ok-ed, he should have come with it. But to say "there's 2 words...wait no there's 4" (we're lucky the show was short, god knows how many would have suffered the ban hammer) just sounded silly and improvised.
c)"Of course when I talk about the sun...." Did he impersonate a dancing indian saying this ?
He did not have much of a point really, but he sure knows how to sound condescending, that's always helpful in an argument.
Yeah, I have to say you made no sense to me with this post...
For point a, What are you talking about? inControl can apply the same logic to himself but how would that be relevant to the point he was making, he was saying it's not his place to deem a black person's offense as illegitimate because he hasn't experienced it and it seems ignorant, he's not expressing a level of offense for black people, he's simply saying that if someone who is black in this case is offended by the word, "Nigger", it's not Destiny's place to say that's illegitimate.
Your point in regards to this makes no sense to me.
For point b, to pick out the part that you did seems kind of stupid since there were moments when inControl was being abrasive and condescending but this certainly wasn't one of them, saying that Destiny is shallow and saying that what he's saying is shallow or what he's saying makes him shallow are slightly different, the way he worded this wasn't any more abrasive that Destiny's responses, which were tame as well.
The number of words he chose jumping from two to four isn't really a point, while I do think singling out "rape" and "nigger" solely early on was an error, he made the point that there are certain "lightning rod words" that are known to be offensive in that they are referential to a specific group of people or to a heinous act that carries weight for some, and if it's not relevant or required, there's no reason to use it.
As for point c, No, he didn't.
inControl had a point, and he argued that point, there was some condescension but it was mostly in response to some slightly fallacious reasoning from Destiny in my opinion. Overall, they both made pretty decent arguments and represented their views adequately I'd say, though it was a little uncomfortable to listen to at times.
Do any of the Destiny fanboys in this thread agree with his position that a black person who wears $200 shoes shouldn't be offended by the word nigger? I'd love to hear an argument in favor of that one.
On May 31 2011 07:02 Homosax wrote: InC did argue, but he also smugly laughed, making him look like an ass.
I honestly had a lot of respect for him, and I was under the impression he was a part of the debate team in university or something, him displaying manners like that just really disappointed me. You could tell at that moment he thought he was "Better" than Destiny.
What did Destiny do? Ignore it.
Hmm.
I would have laughed at what Destiny was saying as well, if I wasn't so pissed off at his arrogance and self-centeredness.
You know, it's wonderful that you don't take his use of the word "faggot" to be offensive. I'm glad that it doesn't bother you. But last night, Destiny basically said that, if he DID say something about gays that happened to offend you, he wouldn't give a fuck, because it's your fault for taking what he said the wrong way, and you don't get to say anything about what's insulting or unfair to you because you weren't beaten or killed during the Stonewall riots, or shot like Harvey Milk, or tortured like Matthew Shepard. In his opinion, unless you've experienced that sort of horror, you don't get to tell him what is or what isn't 'homophobic.' So basically, he doesn't care what you think, he doesn't care how you feel, and he doesn't care how his actions reflect on his sponsors or on TeamLiquid or on esports organizations in general. All that matters is that he didn't mean something a certain way, and everyone else has to just shut the fuck up and deal with it.
But I'm glad that it doesn't bother you when he calls someone a 'nigger faggot', because he wouldn't give two shits if it did.
Are you even serious? Do you think Destiny has some magic skills that enables him to go through his screen and travel to you and have a good look and come to the conclusion that your a faggot? It's a word used to insult people in the gaming community. I doubt everytime Destiny gets cheesed on the ladder and calls someone a faggot he actually think that the person he just lost to is a faggot because he does cheese builds in starcraft2. If you actually think people refer to the other persons sexual orientation when they call someone a faggot online you're fucking stupid and that's the end of it.
That's why generic profanity exist...
You don't have to know that one of your viewers specifically is gay or black in order to avoid using specific words that are used in regards to a specific group when you can use a generic insult instead. It's all rather stupid anyways, but your point doesn't make much sense to me. Does he have to know that someone is black in order to avoid the word, "Nigger"? It's not exactly a versatile word and there are many words that could be used to insult someone that don't carry weight for a specific group of people.
No. If you're calling someone a nigger without knowing if he is actually black or not your not using the word to define a black person, your just using it as a general insult. Do you not think it is silly to get offended by seeing the word nigger? If you call someone retarded online or something similar, do you actually mean that the person you're talking to is retarded or are you just using the word as an insult?
If you call someone a nigger in a derogatory fashion you imply being black is bad as you're using it as an insult. If you call someone retarded you're saying they are stupid, implying that people with mental disabilities are stupid.
That's the general idea. I don't feel very strongly about it personally, but meh, you'd have to be delusional not to understand why some will be offended despite contexts.
"If you call someone a nigger in a derogatory fashion you imply being black is bad as you're using it as an insult." I have an issue with that. Some of us (I guess I'm not the only one) do NOT make these direct associations. Everytime I say shit or fuck, I do not think of a pile of poo or about copulating. Same with the n-word. Although we know it has an history, many people use it nowadays in a way that is detached from that history. It's a habit, a bad one probably but not automatically revealing of any intentions/afterthoughts. I could turn the argument around and tell you that you are the one associating the fact of being black with being bad (since these are your words), so you're the one with the issue.. Destiny never made that kind of statement, you do and then you go after him for intentions you pretend he has. It's a silly logic but as silly as anyone's else going after him. You don't know his intentions.
Some people can be offended ? Some people will always be offended. Whether you will correct your language or not is a matter of...context.
I lived in France and Sweden back then. In France, you can find pastries called nigger heads in boulangeries (just noticed it's the name of a mushroom too). In Sweden, you have a dessert called nigger balls. (and the list is long, and not limited to the n-word )
Am I offending anyone every time I go and buy a baguette or eat a chocolate ball because I support what they do? Should we put a ban on selected dessert names ? Silence the boulangers ?
My point is, I would have preferred if those names weren't what they are - because of the historical context - but to suppress them today is not gonna delete history or solve racism. I (gotta think about it but I think I) even prefer to know that they're still there so I get reminded they're people out there who actually think this kind of bad taste is funny.
On May 31 2011 07:02 Homosax wrote: InC did argue, but he also smugly laughed, making him look like an ass.
I honestly had a lot of respect for him, and I was under the impression he was a part of the debate team in university or something, him displaying manners like that just really disappointed me. You could tell at that moment he thought he was "Better" than Destiny.
What did Destiny do? Ignore it.
Hmm.
I would have laughed at what Destiny was saying as well, if I wasn't so pissed off at his arrogance and self-centeredness.
You know, it's wonderful that you don't take his use of the word "faggot" to be offensive. I'm glad that it doesn't bother you. But last night, Destiny basically said that, if he DID say something about gays that happened to offend you, he wouldn't give a fuck, because it's your fault for taking what he said the wrong way, and you don't get to say anything about what's insulting or unfair to you because you weren't beaten or killed during the Stonewall riots, or shot like Harvey Milk, or tortured like Matthew Shepard. In his opinion, unless you've experienced that sort of horror, you don't get to tell him what is or what isn't 'homophobic.' So basically, he doesn't care what you think, he doesn't care how you feel, and he doesn't care how his actions reflect on his sponsors or on TeamLiquid or on esports organizations in general. All that matters is that he didn't mean something a certain way, and everyone else has to just shut the fuck up and deal with it.
But I'm glad that it doesn't bother you when he calls someone a 'nigger faggot', because he wouldn't give two shits if it did.
Are you even serious? Do you think Destiny has some magic skills that enables him to go through his screen and travel to you and have a good look and come to the conclusion that your a faggot? It's a word used to insult people in the gaming community. I doubt everytime Destiny gets cheesed on the ladder and calls someone a faggot he actually think that the person he just lost to is a faggot because he does cheese builds in starcraft2. If you actually think people refer to the other persons sexual orientation when they call someone a faggot online you're fucking stupid and that's the end of it.
That's why generic profanity exist...
You don't have to know that one of your viewers specifically is gay or black in order to avoid using specific words that are used in regards to a specific group when you can use a generic insult instead. It's all rather stupid anyways, but your point doesn't make much sense to me. Does he have to know that someone is black in order to avoid the word, "Nigger"? It's not exactly a versatile word and there are many words that could be used to insult someone that don't carry weight for a specific group of people.
No. If you're calling someone a nigger without knowing if he is actually black or not your not using the word to define a black person, your just using it as a general insult. Do you not think it is silly to get offended by seeing the word nigger? If you call someone retarded online or something similar, do you actually mean that the person you're talking to is retarded or are you just using the word as an insult?
If you call someone a nigger in a derogatory fashion you imply being black is bad as you're using it as an insult. If you call someone retarded you're saying they are stupid, implying that people with mental disabilities are stupid.
That's the general idea. I don't feel very strongly about it personally, but meh, you'd have to be delusional not to understand why some will be offended despite contexts.
"If you call someone a nigger in a derogatory fashion you imply being black is bad as you're using it as an insult." I have an issue with that. Some of us (I guess I'm not the only one) do NOT make these direct associations. Everytime I say shit or fuck, I do not think of a pile of poo or about copulating. Same with the n-word. Although we know it has an history, many people use it nowadays in a way that is detached from that history. It's a habit, a bad one probably but not automatically revealing of any intentions/afterthoughts. I could turn the argument around and tell you that you are the one associating the fact of being black with being bad (since these are your words), so you're the one with the issue.. Destiny never made that kind of statement, you do and then you go after him for intentions you pretend he has. It's a silly logic but as silly as anyone's else going after him. You don't know his intentions.
Some people can be offended ? Some people will always be offended. Whether you will correct your language or not is a matter of...context.
I lived in France and Sweden back then. In France, you can find pastries called nigger heads in boulangeries (just noticed it's the name of a mushroom too). In Sweden, you have a dessert called nigger balls. (and the list is long, and not limited to the n-word )
Am I offending anyone every time I go and buy a baguette or eat a chocolate ball because I support what they do? Should we put a ban on selected dessert names ? Silence the boulangers ?
My point is, I would have preferred if those names weren't what they are - because of the historical context - but to suppress them today is not gonna delete history or solve racism. I (gotta think about it but I think I) even prefer to know that they're still there so I get reminded they're people out there who actually think this kind of bad taste is funny.
I was thinking about responding to your post about my comments but I think responding here will be much more useful. Basically you are a fucking idiot, if you don't think about a word's meaning before you use it then you are stupid. Words have meanings whether or not you want to pretend their meanings derive completely from context of not.
If you don't understand that the word nigger is a symbol of the torture, rape and murder of blacks then you are an idiot who has no idea what is being discussed and needs to stop spouting about shit you don't understand. What don't you understand is we aren't talking about some generic word that hurt someone ears. We are talking about a word that was literally used as justification for beating of a kid to death and dragging of his corpse behind a truck. This was what it was like in Chicago one of the northern most cities with the most liberal views on racism. This isn't some linguistic game where you get to bull shit all the rest of us or pretend racism is gone. I don't care what is means in Sweden, Destiny isn't Swedish.
No shit, it's his personal stream. Do you think he would say it if he ever casted a tourney?
So basically, you don't give a fuck if what you say offends someone, because it's your stream and you can say what you want. That's pretty sad and pathetic, but it's not entirely indefensible. It just makes you crude and self-centered.
But the fact that you missed the part about how his actions reflect on e-sports, on ROOT gaming, and on teamliquid - that's the part that makes you look ignorant.
Since when does Destiny's personal stream represent Teamliquid or E-sports as a whole? Of course (within limits) he can say whatever he wants, it's his stream.
How can you possibly think that it doesn't?
I don't know how old you are, or what your workplace experience is like, but people are fired and sanctioned every day for things that they do online or within the privacy of their own home, becuase of how those things reflect on their organizations. Right now, the fact that ROOT is standing by Destiny is a tacit endorsement of everything he said yesterday on the show, including his comment about "black kids wearing $200 sneakers", and everything he says on his stream. They're essentially affixing their seal of approval to what he's saying, and now ROOT has to deal with that image, whether they like it or not.
I don't know how old you are but at my age most would have enough reading comprehension to see that I never once mentioned ROOT.
Hit the refresh button and read the edit, since you need me to spell it out for you. A simple logical leap would have sufficed, but since you're a little slow, I made it more explicit for you.
I guess the KKK videos on Youtube represent Google then. Or maybe it has nothing to do with that as Youtube is nothing but a medium for people to submit videos, as TL is a place where streamers can show that they are streaming, or JTV is a place where streamers (surprise) stream. These organizations set their rules and their users (should) follow them, there's nothing more to it. What Destiny says doesn't bloody say anything about TL or JTV.
What goes on between Destiny and ROOT is his and ROOT's business and granted, Destiny represents his team in a way. But TL and e-sports? Nope. Similar to how forums work, here
The opinions expressed by our users do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff.
You're welcome.
I missed the part where Youtube prominently lists the "KKK" to all it's viewers under "Featured" content.
And no, a disclaimer doesn't mean shit in and of itself. It might insulate them from liability if someone sued TL for libel or slander, but in terms of what we're talking about - TL's moral culpability for the content of its streamers - the disclaimer is meaningless.
Regardless, this entire discussion has been a sad fucking joke. As long as prominent members of this community can't understand why they're hurting themselves and other people by using racially-charged language, "e-sports" is going to remain a joke. The road to respectibility and increased visibility isn't found in catering to angry, hate-filled juveniles, period.
Destiny isn't featured because he uses racial slurs, he's featured as he's a pro gamer with a (relatively) huge following. His opinions, featured or not, does not reflect the sites he uses to stream on.
But sure, e-sports is going to remain a joke that caters to angry juveniles. After all, there is nothing more civilized than a pub with mature adults watching a football game. It's like slander isn't even part of their vocab'.
I'm going to have to agree with Destiny here. If you correlate language to maturity you are everything but mature.
Ah, now I see that you're just trolling this discussion. You don't have anything intelligible to add - you're just employing shoddy logic to try to make a nearly irrelevant point. Your first paragraph is conclusory and meaningless, and it ignores both objective reality and the common experience of anyone who's ever been affiliated with a professional sports organization (the idea of the NFL expecting a team to punish a player, rather than the league doing so, is laughable.) Your second paragraph is an irrelevant digression into pointlessness, and your third hilariously conflates the use of racially-charged and insensitive language with vanilla, everyday profanity, in a weak attempt at an ad hominem attack. If this is the most you have to add to the discussion, then I think you don't merit any further response.
I was flying over your post and my eye caught the word "vanilla" and my first reflex was "does he mean vanilla-face ?" Then I went on reading the post. On a normal day, I would never associate this with that. At some point you'll have to wonder if by seeing (racism) everywhere when there's none, you're not actually doing worse than good. You don't have to believe me but that's what happened. Words have a background but they also have the background every one of us gives to them (the context thing). You could also think of me as a racist and so on but then there's no conversation possible.
So basically, you don't give a fuck if what you say offends someone, because it's your stream and you can say what you want. That's pretty sad and pathetic, but it's not entirely indefensible. It just makes you crude and self-centered.
But the fact that you missed the part about how his actions reflect on e-sports, on ROOT gaming, and on teamliquid - that's the part that makes you look ignorant.
Since when does Destiny's personal stream represent Teamliquid or E-sports as a whole? Of course (within limits) he can say whatever he wants, it's his stream.
How can you possibly think that it doesn't?
I don't know how old you are, or what your workplace experience is like, but people are fired and sanctioned every day for things that they do online or within the privacy of their own home, becuase of how those things reflect on their organizations. Right now, the fact that ROOT is standing by Destiny is a tacit endorsement of everything he said yesterday on the show, including his comment about "black kids wearing $200 sneakers", and everything he says on his stream. They're essentially affixing their seal of approval to what he's saying, and now ROOT has to deal with that image, whether they like it or not.
I don't know how old you are but at my age most would have enough reading comprehension to see that I never once mentioned ROOT.
Hit the refresh button and read the edit, since you need me to spell it out for you. A simple logical leap would have sufficed, but since you're a little slow, I made it more explicit for you.
I guess the KKK videos on Youtube represent Google then. Or maybe it has nothing to do with that as Youtube is nothing but a medium for people to submit videos, as TL is a place where streamers can show that they are streaming, or JTV is a place where streamers (surprise) stream. These organizations set their rules and their users (should) follow them, there's nothing more to it. What Destiny says doesn't bloody say anything about TL or JTV.
What goes on between Destiny and ROOT is his and ROOT's business and granted, Destiny represents his team in a way. But TL and e-sports? Nope. Similar to how forums work, here
The opinions expressed by our users do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff.
You're welcome.
I missed the part where Youtube prominently lists the "KKK" to all it's viewers under "Featured" content.
And no, a disclaimer doesn't mean shit in and of itself. It might insulate them from liability if someone sued TL for libel or slander, but in terms of what we're talking about - TL's moral culpability for the content of its streamers - the disclaimer is meaningless.
Regardless, this entire discussion has been a sad fucking joke. As long as prominent members of this community can't understand why they're hurting themselves and other people by using racially-charged language, "e-sports" is going to remain a joke. The road to respectibility and increased visibility isn't found in catering to angry, hate-filled juveniles, period.
Destiny isn't featured because he uses racial slurs, he's featured as he's a pro gamer with a (relatively) huge following. His opinions, featured or not, does not reflect the sites he uses to stream on.
But sure, e-sports is going to remain a joke that caters to angry juveniles. After all, there is nothing more civilized than a pub with mature adults watching a football game. It's like slander isn't even part of their vocab'.
I'm going to have to agree with Destiny here. If you correlate language to maturity you are everything but mature.
Ah, now I see that you're just trolling this discussion. You don't have anything intelligible to add - you're just employing shoddy logic to try to make a nearly irrelevant point. Your first paragraph is conclusory and meaningless, and it ignores both objective reality and the common experience of anyone who's ever been affiliated with a professional sports organization (the idea of the NFL expecting a team to punish a player, rather than the league doing so, is laughable.) Your second paragraph is an irrelevant digression into pointlessness, and your third hilariously conflates the use of racially-charged and insensitive language with vanilla, everyday profanity, in a weak attempt at an ad hominem attack. If this is the most you have to add to the discussion, then I think you don't merit any further response.
I was flying over your post and my eye caught the word "vanilla" and my first reflex was "does he mean vanilla-face ?" Then I went on reading the post. On a normal day, I would never associate this with that. At some point you'll have to wonder if by seeing (racism) everywhere when there's none, you're not actually doing worse than good. You don't have to believe me but that's what happened. Words have a background but they also have the background every one of us gives to them (the context thing). You could also think of me as a racist and so on but then there's no conversation possible.
I guess I have no idea where you are from but you seem to have no experience with the systematic racism in America. I guess in the way you are like Destiny with his rich black man bullshit. This isn't some pipe dream by blacks complaining or seeing something that isn't there. There are very legitimate pressures on blacks that simply do not exist for whites in America and I don't see how you can pretend that it is some kind of oversensitivity. It is reality, so please stop pretending those who really are dealing with it are crying wolf.
On May 31 2011 14:57 Doodsmack wrote: Do any of the Destiny fanboys in this thread agree with his position that a black person who wears $200 shoes shouldn't be offended by the word nigger? I'd love to hear an argument in favor of that one.
His words were more along the lines of black people who are obviously well off trying to say they feel the pain of random people 50+ years ago.
On May 31 2011 10:30 ArgosDelta wrote: You guys are being incredibly hypocritical. The fanboyism towards incontrol is appalling. We are playing a game that is literally about killing other human beings or species. How is this okay but rape isnt? Really? You can murder someone but god forbid you call them a select word, that'll get you thrown in jail for years! Come on guys, we're better than this. If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
Holy shit. This man presents an infallible argument. Until now, I thought we were just playing a video game, but it turns out we've been playing a murder, terrorism, and GENOCIDE simulator! Just by playing Starcraft, we've lost the right to be outraged by any crime that any human being commits, ever. Thought those Nazis at Nuremburg were bad? Well, it turns out you have no right to judge them. After all, you've killed just as many virtual people as they have!
Wait, let's take this even farther. We haven't just simulated virtual crimes in StarCraft. We've committed virtual acts of terror in just about every game we've ever played. Remember this monstrosity of a game?
That's right. According to ArgosDelta, anybody who's played this game is guilty of simulating innumerable acts of cruelty against animals. All of you who've played this game are guilty of committing genocide against turtles, giant moles, urchins, lotus flowers, and American football players.
Remember kids: next time you meet a PETA protestor, ask him if he played Super Mario World. If he did, tell him that he's a turtle-stomping, dinosaur-enslaving, animal-hating monster!
The use of the word rape needs to end for the sole reason that it is unnecessary. The argument that there is no substitute for words like fuck and shit is fine. Yes, you need them to express yourself, but you can always use 'kill, murder, defeat, overcome etc etc' instead of rape. You are not being dishonest by saying kill instead of rape. When rape is used in video games it carries unnecessary connotation. The connotation of raping your opponent is purposefully drawing a parallel to the unwilling submission to your will in a forceful manner. There is no reason to use the word when humiliate or dominate or subjugate would work just fine. The only reason to use the word rape is to draw in its real world parallel, which is unnecessary.
On May 31 2011 14:57 Doodsmack wrote: Do any of the Destiny fanboys in this thread agree with his position that a black person who wears $200 shoes shouldn't be offended by the word nigger? I'd love to hear an argument in favor of that one.
His words were more along the lines of black people who are obviously well off trying to say they feel the pain of random people 50+ years ago.
Wow this makes that argument even worse. At first I was hesitant to call Destiny a racist but holy shit. This dude really is saying that black people shouldn't be offended by how their ancestors or possibly family member were treated when you bring it up using a word like 'nigger' because they had to work harder to overcome stereotypes and become prosperous. It is like he thinks racism has just been erased. I don't think it is overextending to call a guy racist who literally thinks that having expensive things means that someone can't be offended by the murder, beating, and exploitation of an entire group of people. Hell, even I am offended when he uses this word does that mean he is going to look through what I own and try to tell me whether or not I should identify with those who have suffered because of this word.
Basically he is an ignorant racist douche who decided to spout his opinion in a forum where I at least hope people would know better. This guy obviously has no understanding of what really happened or how this word was used to systematically demonize an entire race of people. Either that or he is a heartless ass who has no concern for anyone else.
On May 31 2011 10:30 ArgosDelta wrote: You guys are being incredibly hypocritical. The fanboyism towards incontrol is appalling. We are playing a game that is literally about killing other human beings or species. How is this okay but rape isnt? Really? You can murder someone but god forbid you call them a select word, that'll get you thrown in jail for years! Come on guys, we're better than this. If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
Holy shit. This man presents an infallible argument. Until now, I thought we were just playing a video game, but it turns out we've been playing a murder, terrorism, and GENOCIDE simulator! Just by playing Starcraft, we've lost the right to be outraged by any crime that any human being commits, ever. Thought those Nazis at Nuremburg were bad? Well, it turns out you have no right to judge them. After all, you've killed just as many virtual people as they have!
Wait, let's take this even farther. We haven't just simulated virtual crimes in StarCraft. We've committed virtual acts of terror in just about every game we've ever played. Remember this monstrosity of a game?
That's right. According to ArgosDelta, anybody who's played this game is guilty of simulating innumerable acts of cruelty against animals. All of you who've played this game are guilty of committing genocide against turtles, giant moles, urchins, lotus flowers, and American football players.
Remember kids: next time you meet a PETA protestor, ask him if he played Super Mario World. If he did, tell him that he's a turtle-stomping, dinosaur-enslaving, animal-hating monster!
Just a side note... When "scientists" do "research" on how videogame violence negatively affects people, if a game includes *any* sort of killing, it's considered violent, wich is why for example super mario and pac-man are on the list of violent video games.
But I from what I read in both of your posts, you seem to have thesame point? It's all about the context!
On May 31 2011 10:30 ArgosDelta wrote: You guys are being incredibly hypocritical. The fanboyism towards incontrol is appalling. We are playing a game that is literally about killing other human beings or species. How is this okay but rape isnt? Really? You can murder someone but god forbid you call them a select word, that'll get you thrown in jail for years! Come on guys, we're better than this. If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
Holy shit. This man presents an infallible argument. Until now, I thought we were just playing a video game, but it turns out we've been playing a murder, terrorism, and GENOCIDE simulator! Just by playing Starcraft, we've lost the right to be outraged by any crime that any human being commits, ever. Thought those Nazis at Nuremburg were bad? Well, it turns out you have no right to judge them. After all, you've killed just as many virtual people as they have!
Wait, let's take this even farther. We haven't just simulated virtual crimes in StarCraft. We've committed virtual acts of terror in just about every game we've ever played. Remember this monstrosity of a game?
That's right. According to ArgosDelta, anybody who's played this game is guilty of simulating innumerable acts of cruelty against animals. All of you who've played this game are guilty of committing genocide against turtles, giant moles, urchins, lotus flowers, and American football players.
Remember kids: next time you meet a PETA protestor, ask him if he played Super Mario World. If he did, tell him that he's a turtle-stomping, dinosaur-enslaving, animal-hating monster!
You are trying extremely hard to put words in his mouth. What were you even trying to say exactly? It is true we are playing a war simulator... by our current standards of society it is nothing, but that dose not make it anything else just because you posted some irrelevant video of Mario.
Another fail argument of "its part of a video game, so it doesn't matter". So if someone orally describes the death of a Marine in gory and violent a fashion as possible is that not acceptable either? But because its pixels on a screen it is 100% immune to any kind of criticism.
Your logic has so many holes in it, your post was pretty terrible to =/
Just to dumb down to your level for a minute, in Super Mario, Mario is actually just trying to save the princess, the turtles and shit are just getting in his way. Not exactly the same as a bitter struggle of survival between 3 species in full HD with blood and body parts. The ideas the game has about murder/terrorism/genocide are all very real and serious things in the world today. Millions of people across the world have been directly effected by these same issues. While I am not sure if people can relate to Bowser stealing princess Toadstool, or when Mario knocked out a turtle. Anyways /end rant on that.
On May 31 2011 13:47 Rabiator wrote: There was another myth in the last episode as well and it goes like this: Educating / raising a child is the responsibility of the parents!
To this I say BOLLOCKS, we dont live in the 50s anymore where daddy left in the morning to go to work and earn money and mommy did cleaning, cooking and the care for the children. Todays society looks much different in that we have tons of SINGLE PARENTS who have to make money and go to work while raising some children and lots of families where BOTH PARENTS WORK. So the reality nowadays is that our teens are educating themselves after school nowadays. djWheat can work at home and take care of his son when he does his own shows, but I would guess miniWheat is experienced enough with the computer to "do his own thing" and he might stumble upon some stream or other eventually ...
I take my nieces to school every day on bike. There are other parents who take their children by car, but use the niche reserved for the bus to say good bye to their kids (while keeping the engine running) and sometimes there are so many of them that the bus cant get in there and has to stop somewhere else. These parents are giving a bad example to other kids and not only their own by ignoring rules in the full realization that they wont ever be punished for breaking them. Is that a good thing to learn for children? Nope.
So the reality now *should be* that all adults are responsible for the education of the next generation, because that is what our respective country will look like in 30 years. Does anyone really want to have people running around and using foul language? How about an american politician greeting a statesman from Africa in 30 years with a friendly "Yo Nigga, whats up?" Idols in our societies have to give good examples of how to behave and swearing / cursing casters dont do that! Our societies are supposed to evolve and not devolve into the stone age.
Oh and "the internet" is public ... worldwide (with the exception of certain restrictive countries) ... so "your channel on justin" isnt the same as talking in your own home. The argument of "you dont have to watch it" only applies to people who can make a fully conscious choice ... which any underage child is not.
Miniwheat was 6 feet away from DJWheat during that episode. I guess Destiny's child wasn't very far either. So chances are, provided they weren't busy surfing some KKK website, they heard plenty of foul words during that episode (and many others). From what you said, do I have to conclude that both Wheat and Destiny do not provide a decent education to their children ? Or ?
Also educating children IS the responsability of the parents (and of the school system). Even if both parents work. If they fail at it, it's sad but don't blame internet for it. Both my parents worked, I spent a LOT of time in front of the television when I was young, but my values are my parents' values and they're hopefully pretty decent, despite watching a lot of nasty stuff on TV back then (not telling them about it). I'm not saying it has no effect but I think it is marginal (with some exceptions). Might change my mind about it since I haven't seen studies about this so if you got some to prove your point, please share.
First off, thanks to Destiny for being himself on his stream, as it's highly entertaining to watch. You need to also get Debo in more for some more back and forth, as he's equally awesome. Love you man (no homo).
There is absolutely nothing wrong with using what the common folk might construe as harsh language on your stream. Nothing whatsoever. The weight and meaning of words are always dependent on the context and subjective. For anyone who abhors swearing in general, I see it as my right and duty to direct to a man smarter than myself, Stephen Fry, on the joys of swearing:
People who get butt hurt by words, especially outside the context of hatred behind them, really need to grow up. I know it's tempting to think that by banning the usage of the word nigger you're somehow magically solving racism in the world, or even making it a slight dent in it. This is untrue, as it will only strive to breed more of it. Hard problems cannot be solved in an easy way.
On some level I can at least somewhat relate to people not liking the word nigger. But, once again, you'll simply need to let it go. Let go of the racial connotations behind the word, as it is already in widespread use out there in the real world without any such notion behind it.
I simply cannot understand how would anyone get upset by someone calling them a faggot, or raping them for that matter, in the context of video games. I, for one, have been doing that for nearly 20 years now, and have no intention of stopping.
Feel free to call me anything if our paths cross, for I will not be offended by mere words. It's all in good sport, after all.
I think Destiny has a GIANT hole in his logic about his vocabulary and why he choses to use it.
Firstly, Destiny claims that he is honest and uncensored and therefore needs to use words like fuck, shit, rape, and nigger. Destiny claims that these words clearly have no substitute and to try and find one would be warping his intended meaning and being dishonest. I can understand and get behind this.
In the case of 'fuck' and 'shit' I 100% agree.
However, in his defense of his usage of the words 'rape' and 'nigger' Destiny claims that he is not using the words in their literal, real world meaning. And that people are being overly sensitive and unfair to be offended at his word choice. I think this argument clearly conflicts with his initial claim. Lets take the word rape for example:
Destiny says 'I raped that player' on his stream. Now by his first claim, there is no other phrase that could capture what Destiny did to his opponent and that trying to use other words would be dishonest as to what Destiny really intends. So Destiny intends the word rape, he believes there is no substitute. Words like subjugate, dominate, defeat, overcome, humiliate, 'blow out of the water' etc,... are not accurate descriptions of what Destiny did to his opponent.
So where does that leave us? The definition of rape. to forcefully make someone submit to your sexual will. But clearly this is offensive and not exactly what Destiny means by what he said. So by his second claim Destiny actually meant a different version of the word rape. He meant something along the lines of 'to exert complete and utter control or influence upon.' Now this is probably what Destiny meant. But this meaning clearly fits the words 'dominate' and 'subjugate' better than it does the word rape and this clearly brings up issues with Destiny's initial claim that he says what he intends for pure honesty. So why use the word rape? the only reason is to intentionally add a sexual connotation. Which people may find offensive and thus the argument that Destiny 'didn't mean it that way' is invalid by his first claim.
In summary: Destiny claims he says what he intends with no filter. He is purely honest. Therefore, the argument that his usage of words like rape and nigger, are being taken out of context and he does not mean their direct definitions is incorrect because if he doesn't mean their exact definitions, there are other words that more accurately describe what he is trying to portray and by his first claim he should use those other words instead. So the only explanation of using words like rape and nigger is to indeed attach all of their connotations intentionally.
On May 31 2011 10:30 ArgosDelta wrote: You guys are being incredibly hypocritical. The fanboyism towards incontrol is appalling. We are playing a game that is literally about killing other human beings or species. How is this okay but rape isnt? Really? You can murder someone but god forbid you call them a select word, that'll get you thrown in jail for years! Come on guys, we're better than this. If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
Holy shit. This man presents an infallible argument. Until now, I thought we were just playing a video game, but it turns out we've been playing a murder, terrorism, and GENOCIDE simulator! Just by playing Starcraft, we've lost the right to be outraged by any crime that any human being commits, ever. Thought those Nazis at Nuremburg were bad? Well, it turns out you have no right to judge them. After all, you've killed just as many virtual people as they have!
Wait, let's take this even farther. We haven't just simulated virtual crimes in StarCraft. We've committed virtual acts of terror in just about every game we've ever played. Remember this monstrosity of a game?
That's right. According to ArgosDelta, anybody who's played this game is guilty of simulating innumerable acts of cruelty against animals. All of you who've played this game are guilty of committing genocide against turtles, giant moles, urchins, lotus flowers, and American football players.
Remember kids: next time you meet a PETA protestor, ask him if he played Super Mario World. If he did, tell him that he's a turtle-stomping, dinosaur-enslaving, animal-hating monster!
You are trying extremely hard to put words in his mouth. What were you even trying to say exactly? It is true we are playing a war simulator... by our current standards of society it is nothing, but that dose not make it anything else just because you posted some irrelevant video of Mario.
Another fail argument of "its part of a video game, so it doesn't matter". So if someone orally describes the death of a Marine in gory and violent a fashion as possible is that not acceptable either? But because its pixels on a screen it is 100% immune to any kind of criticism.
Your logic has so many holes in it, your post was pretty terrible to =/
Just to dumb down to your level for a minute, in Super Mario, Mario is actually just trying to save the princess, the turtles and shit are just getting in his way. Not exactly the same as a bitter struggle of survival between 3 species in full HD with blood and body parts. The ideas the game has about murder/terrorism/genocide are all very real and serious things in the world today. Millions of people across the world have been directly effected by these same issues. While I am not sure if people can relate to Bowser stealing princess Toadstool, or when Mario knocked out a turtle. Anyways /end rant on that.
Lol I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. I was just having some fun with his ridiculous analogy. Other posters have already pointed out the absurdity of comparing Starcraft to a genocide simulator. But really, comparing the destruction of giant bugs, glowing aliens, and space humans to
Also, just to make the point clear: he argued that people are hypocritical for getting upset over rape jokes when we're playing (in his words) a "genocide simulator." All I did was take his twisted logic to its natural conclusion. If people aren't allowed to get upset about "rape" because they "simulated" genocide, then they can't be allowed to get upset about *anything* they've simulated in a video game. So that means anybody who's played GTA 4 can't get upset about prostitutes being murdered, and anybody who played Super Mario World can't get upset when a species of turtles faces extinction.
On May 31 2011 14:39 hunts wrote: eurelastreet why are you so fanaticly defending destiny? Incontrol was right in that argument, almost everyone else can see it, but you insist on defending destiny, almost blindly. He's saying that destiny can't say its not offensive to anyone because of how he uses it, which is true. Have destiny go to downtown new yowrk and start saying nigger loudly and have him try to explain that it shouldn't be offensive because of how he uses it. You go and try to turn that argument around by saying "but incontrols calling him shallow!" Yeah he is,and he's right. It's quite shallow to say that "because of how i use this word it's now not offensive to people" And no he did not impersonate a dancing india nsaying when he talks about the sun, that's again your imagination making him out to be the bad guy because of how much you like destiny.
I'm no Destiny fanboy (not that it'd make a difference in my opinion) But you see, I've seen comedians on french TV doing exactly what you suggested.
In case you don't speak french : basically the guy with the helmet goes to a famous neighborhood of Paris with a huge immigrant population, steps on the chair and shouts "go back home arabs and niggas". The guy doing this is part of a famous trio of comedians : one white, one black, one arab, this was on public television, with public money and was one of the biggest shows in the 90s in France. Is this totally unacceptable ? I'm having a hard time understanding where you draw the line. To me, Destiny has a show, no evil intention, some crass humor but humor nonetheless and some casting talent, that's what matters to me, he can use the n-word if he wants to because I don't see the context as offensive. Prove me he has evil intentions/hate speech whatever and I'll change my mind but so far I think most of the haters are prejudiced against him because of some weird (to me!) notion of pol. correctness.
EPT![[image loading]](http://island-adv.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Nazi+Death+Camp1.jpg)
