|
I feel like Maddelisk got a butthurt because of Kas joke and being high horse with her statement
|
On November 22 2014 15:45 Superbanana wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:38 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:34 Superbanana wrote:On November 22 2014 15:28 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:26 Superbanana wrote:On November 22 2014 15:19 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:17 Superbanana wrote:On November 22 2014 14:54 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 14:49 brickrd wrote:On November 22 2014 14:43 Pangpootata wrote:
Imagine if Kas had said "Going to kill an opponent soon". Would he have gotten banned for that?
No.
But murder is a more serious crime than rape, so why would he get banned for saying "Going to rape some girl soon"?
Isn't it silly how peoples' repressed sexual desires have made rape an emotionally charged issue, while more serious crimes such as murder can be talked about trivially?
This whole issue disgusts me. your logic is childish at best and sinister at worst, there are so many reasons it's different that i don't know where to begin "kill" or "to die", linguistically speaking, doesn't always carry a connotation of ending a human life. it's much more common and accepted for "death" to be used metaphorically in any number of ways. your car's engine died. your passion for starcraft died. a bill died in the senate. to "kill" your opponent can simply mean to end their chances of winning the tournament, to stop their momentum. there is an almost infinite precedent for using "kill" this way in the english language. using "rape" to mean "defeat in a competition" is not something that's typically seen or accepted outside of a culture of sexually immature male gamers behind the veil of the internet, and for good reason how many pro SC2 gamers do you think live in real fear of being murdered on an everyday basis? even in violent areas your odds of being murdered are fairly low. do you know what the odds of a woman being raped or sexually abused in her life are? not just by a stranger but by a family member or friend? do you actually understand how common and pervasive the problem of sexual abuse against women is? it's a matter of reality. it's not reality to presume that a gamer will have anxiety or fear triggered by a comment about being "killed" at their game, especially since the game's context in itself involves fictional soldiers fighting and killing each other in a war that you think the reason for not wanting women to feel harassed and live in fear is "repressed sexual desires" is possibly the most offensive thing i've seen in this thread Outside of the context of online games, rape has always meant to seize or capture by force. If you go look up the etymology of rape, the sexual meaning is only a very recent development, which I'm sure anyone who reads classics and eschews the vernacular would know. Besides, it is more common for people to be killed (by any factor) than raped. Anyway, most women don't live in fear of being raped unless it's some third world country or some shitty pseudo-first world country. Yeah, who cares about the third world or pseudo first world countries right? If someone is offended there nobody cares o_O #sarcasm Yeah, we also can't make jokes about water or medicine, because people in third world countries will get offended because they die from the lack of that all the time. If you extend this line of thinking, you can't actually joke about anything because somebody somewhere is bound to get offended. You are using a snowball fallacy here, lets continue. We cannot discuss anything since somebody might disagree and might be offended. We should stop talking, since anything we say can directly or indirectly reflect some opinion, that someone is bound to disagree with. Thats not how it works. Its simple, discuss if its ok or not for Kas to tweet that, do not use a fictional example and claim its the same thing. But where do you draw the cutoff point? What number of people getting offended? Come up with a system to measure the magnitude of offensiveness? Wouldn't any cutoff point be arbitrary? It's all a silly business really. Where to draw a cutoff point? I think they did it right. Its not about numbers, it was directed towards an individual, so that is enough. If it was a clearly hamless tweet, then ofc he should not be banned, but that is not the case. Its not precise, but its probably in accordance with the law, a good standard by any means. The cutoff point argument was referring to the issue of what jokes are acceptable in response to your accusation of a snowball fallacy, not the Kas incident. There is no clear cutoff point, indeed. Its up to each organization to judge that, and the society can accept it or not. But its a fallacy because that "rape jokes not being ok" do not imply that water and medicine jokes are not ok. "Extending this line of thinking" is the fallacy.
Extending this line of thinking is the idea behind legal precedent. It's hardly a fallacy.
|
On November 22 2014 15:43 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:39 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:29 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:25 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:23 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:14 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:13 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:10 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:02 ddayzy wrote:
[quote]
6000-8000 woman gets raped each year in Norway, that only counts vaginal prnetrating and is consideted a very conservative estimate.
>40000 people in Norway get killed per year (by any factor). Dying is more common than getting raped Anyway, the basic argument you are putting forth is that although killing is more serious than rape, more people live in fear of getting rape, i.e. it's the fear of it actually happening rather than the severity of the crime. Extending this logic wouldn't it mean threatening to punch someone is worse than threatening to rape someone because more people live in fear of getting hit than getting raped? I do agree that people should try not to rape each other, but this whole business about rape receiving special attention is silly. Im sorry, your argument is that more people die then woman get raped so its ok to tell woman you will rape them? No. I'm saying that telling people you will kill them is more serious then telling people you will rape them. So if people don't get banned for telling people you will kill them, they shouldn't be banned for saying the same thing about rape. It's a matter of simple logical consistency, If you told someone who had to live daily with the fear of being killed that you would kill them, and if the person saying he would kill you belonged to the group who had a history of killing people like you I would have reacted just as strongly. Also you do realize nobody have commited a crime? The argument is simply, do you think its ok to tell woman ypu will rape them? If i went over to your girlfriend and told her i would rape her you would tell her its no big deal because being killed is worse then being raped? No it wouldn't be fine. But it would be much worse if you went up to her and told her you were going to kill her. Still don't get the point? Yes i do, you are agreeing that you should not tell woman you will rape them. Case closed. Now if you want to campaign for banning people for saying they will kill a oponent who is fearing for his life go ahead. I dont think you will meet much tesistance. Case is not closed yet. Players are banned for talking about rape, but not banned for talking about killing an opponent. Since Kill > rape, either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. One person got disqualified from one tournament for telling a girl he was gonna rep her. You are still drawing a false equivilant. Sexual harrassment is something most woman experience in one form or anorher. Most people dont live in fear of being killed. If one person did and someone said they was going to kill him i would suport him getting disqualified from a tournamen as well. Now you tell me where this happened? Its also peculiar that you defend something you admit to being wrong because you think something worse is being accepted. Wouldent it be better to fight to get this thing that is worse banned as well? Insted of saying something you think is wrong should be allowed? Surely if we find a low point we shouldent try to sink every other standar to it but try to raise the low point insted? Yeap, that's why I said either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. But to me, regardless of whether a high or low standard is chosen, logical consistency is more important. Edit: Regarding the point about fear, I already gave an example. More people live in fear of getting hit (since it's more common) than getting rape. So would this mean that threatening to hit someone is worse than threatening to rape someone? Again it goes back to the point about consistency. It's best to either ban all jokes about crimes, or allow all, instead of doing things arbitrarily based on feelings.
What? What you are saying makes no sense at all.
I give up.
I allready told you, find me one example of a guy fearing for his life that gets told that he will be killed by someone and i will support disqualifying tbat person from a starcraft tournament.
I would strongly disagree with hitting being more common then sexual harrassment based on any given night on the town. That you even manage to compare all the sexual bs they have to take from guys to someone being afraid of being hit is amazing.
|
On November 22 2014 15:40 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:36 Darkwhite wrote:On November 22 2014 15:35 lichter wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 10bulgares wrote:On November 22 2014 15:10 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:02 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 14:54 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 14:49 brickrd wrote:On November 22 2014 14:43 Pangpootata wrote:
Imagine if Kas had said "Going to kill an opponent soon". Would he have gotten banned for that?
No.
But murder is a more serious crime than rape, so why would he get banned for saying "Going to rape some girl soon"?
Isn't it silly how peoples' repressed sexual desires have made rape an emotionally charged issue, while more serious crimes such as murder can be talked about trivially?
This whole issue disgusts me. your logic is childish at best and sinister at worst, there are so many reasons it's different that i don't know where to begin "kill" or "to die", linguistically speaking, doesn't always carry a connotation of ending a human life. it's much more common and accepted for "death" to be used metaphorically in any number of ways. your car's engine died. your passion for starcraft died. a bill died in the senate. to "kill" your opponent can simply mean to end their chances of winning the tournament, to stop their momentum. there is an almost infinite precedent for using "kill" this way in the english language. using "rape" to mean "defeat in a competition" is not something that's typically seen or accepted outside of a culture of sexually immature male gamers behind the veil of the internet, and for good reason how many pro SC2 gamers do you think live in real fear of being murdered on an everyday basis? even in violent areas your odds of being murdered are fairly low. do you know what the odds of a woman being raped or sexually abused in her life are? not just by a stranger but by a family member or friend? do you actually understand how common and pervasive the problem of sexual abuse against women is? it's a matter of reality. it's not reality to presume that a gamer will have anxiety or fear triggered by a comment about being "killed" at their game, especially since the game's context in itself involves fictional soldiers fighting and killing each other in a war that you think the reason for not wanting women to feel harassed and live in fear is "repressed sexual desires" is possibly the most offensive thing i've seen in this thread Outside of the context of online games, rape has always meant to seize or capture by force. If you go look up the etymology of rape, the sexual meaning is only a very recent development, which I'm sure anyone who reads classics and eschews the vernacular would know. Besides, it is more common for people to be killed (by any factor) than raped. Anyway, most women don't live in fear of being raped unless it's some third world country or some shitty pseudo-first world country. 6000-8000 woman gets raped each year in Norway, that only counts vaginal prnetrating and is consideted a very conservative estimate. >40000 people in Norway get killed per year (by any factor). Dying is more common than getting raped Anyway, the basic argument you are putting forth is that although killing is more serious than rape, more people live in fear of getting rape, i.e. it's the fear of it actually happening rather than the severity of the crime. Extending this logic wouldn't it mean threatening to punch someone is worse than threatening to rape someone because more people live in fear of getting hit than getting raped? I do agree that people should try not to rape each other, but this whole business about rape receiving special attention is silly. The 40000 number you cite is all people dieing in Norway. Probably a very little proportion of them actually "gets killled". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate111 victims of intentional homicide in 2011 Even that is a crazy outlier. 77 of those were killed by the same person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statisticsvs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rateHomicide rate per 100,000 is ~6.9 Rape rate per 100,000 is ~14.75
Not sure where you get those numbers. On the wiki pages, I find 35 or 20 for rape in Norway and 2.2 for homicides.
|
On November 22 2014 15:33 Komentaja wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:30 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:28 Komentaja wrote:
I wish someone would actually translate Maddelisk's response instead of using google. It's unintelligible in key points.
Kas' post sounded bad to me at first, because I didn't know there was a tournament coming up (even with his hashtag making it logical that there was). I don't follow the SC2 scene much anymore, but I did for a few years. That would make me more likely than most to be accepting of his statement. Yet, I wasn't at all. That makes it obvious that the tournament organizers would not want to have the tweet associated with their tournament.
Fragbite Masters (of slaves?) isn't the most appealing name to be connected with a company, however. And this is a "violent", bloody game. Why draw the harsh line at the point of an okay joke (given the right context)? Humor always offends people, and no publicity is bad publicity. I can see why Fragbite Masters would be annoyed, and even why they would disqualify Kas. What I don't understand is how they would be dumb enough to do so. I don't get why people make news stories of presidential candidates doing idiotic things in their childhood, or even of doing anything more than thirty years ago. Who are you trying to impress by blowing up trivial things? It's not working... Maddelisk and several femals in and outside the scene got hurt by that sentence. Thats trivial? There is no source in this thread saying that is the case. Edit: and even if it was the case that they got "hurt", then [b]yes , I believe it's trivial. It sounds like a manufactured wound in that case.
Look at the tweets they wrote. Many were hurt. Pushing woman out of the scene and other peoples feelings are trivial...
I geniounly cant believe tbe people in this threat. I thought people here were more intelligent and more evolved then this.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On November 22 2014 15:54 10bulgares wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:40 lichter wrote:On November 22 2014 15:36 Darkwhite wrote:On November 22 2014 15:35 lichter wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 10bulgares wrote:On November 22 2014 15:10 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:02 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 14:54 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 14:49 brickrd wrote:On November 22 2014 14:43 Pangpootata wrote:
Imagine if Kas had said "Going to kill an opponent soon". Would he have gotten banned for that?
No.
But murder is a more serious crime than rape, so why would he get banned for saying "Going to rape some girl soon"?
Isn't it silly how peoples' repressed sexual desires have made rape an emotionally charged issue, while more serious crimes such as murder can be talked about trivially?
This whole issue disgusts me. your logic is childish at best and sinister at worst, there are so many reasons it's different that i don't know where to begin "kill" or "to die", linguistically speaking, doesn't always carry a connotation of ending a human life. it's much more common and accepted for "death" to be used metaphorically in any number of ways. your car's engine died. your passion for starcraft died. a bill died in the senate. to "kill" your opponent can simply mean to end their chances of winning the tournament, to stop their momentum. there is an almost infinite precedent for using "kill" this way in the english language. using "rape" to mean "defeat in a competition" is not something that's typically seen or accepted outside of a culture of sexually immature male gamers behind the veil of the internet, and for good reason how many pro SC2 gamers do you think live in real fear of being murdered on an everyday basis? even in violent areas your odds of being murdered are fairly low. do you know what the odds of a woman being raped or sexually abused in her life are? not just by a stranger but by a family member or friend? do you actually understand how common and pervasive the problem of sexual abuse against women is? it's a matter of reality. it's not reality to presume that a gamer will have anxiety or fear triggered by a comment about being "killed" at their game, especially since the game's context in itself involves fictional soldiers fighting and killing each other in a war that you think the reason for not wanting women to feel harassed and live in fear is "repressed sexual desires" is possibly the most offensive thing i've seen in this thread Outside of the context of online games, rape has always meant to seize or capture by force. If you go look up the etymology of rape, the sexual meaning is only a very recent development, which I'm sure anyone who reads classics and eschews the vernacular would know. Besides, it is more common for people to be killed (by any factor) than raped. Anyway, most women don't live in fear of being raped unless it's some third world country or some shitty pseudo-first world country. 6000-8000 woman gets raped each year in Norway, that only counts vaginal prnetrating and is consideted a very conservative estimate. >40000 people in Norway get killed per year (by any factor). Dying is more common than getting raped Anyway, the basic argument you are putting forth is that although killing is more serious than rape, more people live in fear of getting rape, i.e. it's the fear of it actually happening rather than the severity of the crime. Extending this logic wouldn't it mean threatening to punch someone is worse than threatening to rape someone because more people live in fear of getting hit than getting raped? I do agree that people should try not to rape each other, but this whole business about rape receiving special attention is silly. The 40000 number you cite is all people dieing in Norway. Probably a very little proportion of them actually "gets killled". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate111 victims of intentional homicide in 2011 Even that is a crazy outlier. 77 of those were killed by the same person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statisticsvs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rateHomicide rate per 100,000 is ~6.9 Rape rate per 100,000 is ~14.75 Not sure where you get those numbers. On the wiki pages, I find 35 or 20 for rape in Norway and 2.2 for homicides.
Global average, oops
Singling out Norway made little sense except for a bunch of poster's examples
|
This thread is out of control.
Also Community News-worthy? I dunno Kev.
|
On November 22 2014 15:53 ddayzy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:43 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:39 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:29 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:25 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:23 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:14 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:13 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:10 Pangpootata wrote:
[quote]
>40000 people in Norway get killed per year (by any factor). Dying is more common than getting raped
Anyway, the basic argument you are putting forth is that although killing is more serious than rape, more people live in fear of getting rape, i.e. it's the fear of it actually happening rather than the severity of the crime.
Extending this logic wouldn't it mean threatening to punch someone is worse than threatening to rape someone because more people live in fear of getting hit than getting raped?
I do agree that people should try not to rape each other, but this whole business about rape receiving special attention is silly. Im sorry, your argument is that more people die then woman get raped so its ok to tell woman you will rape them? No. I'm saying that telling people you will kill them is more serious then telling people you will rape them. So if people don't get banned for telling people you will kill them, they shouldn't be banned for saying the same thing about rape. It's a matter of simple logical consistency, If you told someone who had to live daily with the fear of being killed that you would kill them, and if the person saying he would kill you belonged to the group who had a history of killing people like you I would have reacted just as strongly. Also you do realize nobody have commited a crime? The argument is simply, do you think its ok to tell woman ypu will rape them? If i went over to your girlfriend and told her i would rape her you would tell her its no big deal because being killed is worse then being raped? No it wouldn't be fine. But it would be much worse if you went up to her and told her you were going to kill her. Still don't get the point? Yes i do, you are agreeing that you should not tell woman you will rape them. Case closed. Now if you want to campaign for banning people for saying they will kill a oponent who is fearing for his life go ahead. I dont think you will meet much tesistance. Case is not closed yet. Players are banned for talking about rape, but not banned for talking about killing an opponent. Since Kill > rape, either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. One person got disqualified from one tournament for telling a girl he was gonna rep her. You are still drawing a false equivilant. Sexual harrassment is something most woman experience in one form or anorher. Most people dont live in fear of being killed. If one person did and someone said they was going to kill him i would suport him getting disqualified from a tournamen as well. Now you tell me where this happened? Its also peculiar that you defend something you admit to being wrong because you think something worse is being accepted. Wouldent it be better to fight to get this thing that is worse banned as well? Insted of saying something you think is wrong should be allowed? Surely if we find a low point we shouldent try to sink every other standar to it but try to raise the low point insted? Yeap, that's why I said either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. But to me, regardless of whether a high or low standard is chosen, logical consistency is more important. Edit: Regarding the point about fear, I already gave an example. More people live in fear of getting hit (since it's more common) than getting rape. So would this mean that threatening to hit someone is worse than threatening to rape someone? Again it goes back to the point about consistency. It's best to either ban all jokes about crimes, or allow all, instead of doing things arbitrarily based on feelings. What? What you are saying makes no sense at all. I give up. I allready told you, find me one example of a guy fearing for his life that gets told that he will be killed by someone and i will support disqualifying tbat person from a starcraft tournament. I would strongly disagree with hitting being more common then sexual harrassment based on any given night on the town. That you even manage to compare all the sexual bs they have to take from guys to someone being afraid of being hit is amazing.
1) Do you think maddelisk really feared that Kas would rape her?
1) sexual harassment =/= rape. Please stop.
|
On November 22 2014 15:56 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:54 10bulgares wrote:On November 22 2014 15:40 lichter wrote:On November 22 2014 15:36 Darkwhite wrote:On November 22 2014 15:35 lichter wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 10bulgares wrote:On November 22 2014 15:10 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:02 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 14:54 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 14:49 brickrd wrote:
[quote]your logic is childish at best and sinister at worst, there are so many reasons it's different that i don't know where to begin
"kill" or "to die", linguistically speaking, doesn't always carry a connotation of ending a human life. it's much more common and accepted for "death" to be used metaphorically in any number of ways. your car's engine died. your passion for starcraft died. a bill died in the senate. to "kill" your opponent can simply mean to end their chances of winning the tournament, to stop their momentum. there is an almost infinite precedent for using "kill" this way in the english language. using "rape" to mean "defeat in a competition" is not something that's typically seen or accepted outside of a culture of sexually immature male gamers behind the veil of the internet, and for good reason
how many pro SC2 gamers do you think live in real fear of being murdered on an everyday basis? even in violent areas your odds of being murdered are fairly low. do you know what the odds of a woman being raped or sexually abused in her life are? not just by a stranger but by a family member or friend? do you actually understand how common and pervasive the problem of sexual abuse against women is? it's a matter of reality. it's not reality to presume that a gamer will have anxiety or fear triggered by a comment about being "killed" at their game, especially since the game's context in itself involves fictional soldiers fighting and killing each other in a war
that you think the reason for not wanting women to feel harassed and live in fear is "repressed sexual desires" is possibly the most offensive thing i've seen in this thread Outside of the context of online games, rape has always meant to seize or capture by force. If you go look up the etymology of rape, the sexual meaning is only a very recent development, which I'm sure anyone who reads classics and eschews the vernacular would know. Besides, it is more common for people to be killed (by any factor) than raped. Anyway, most women don't live in fear of being raped unless it's some third world country or some shitty pseudo-first world country. 6000-8000 woman gets raped each year in Norway, that only counts vaginal prnetrating and is consideted a very conservative estimate. >40000 people in Norway get killed per year (by any factor). Dying is more common than getting raped Anyway, the basic argument you are putting forth is that although killing is more serious than rape, more people live in fear of getting rape, i.e. it's the fear of it actually happening rather than the severity of the crime. Extending this logic wouldn't it mean threatening to punch someone is worse than threatening to rape someone because more people live in fear of getting hit than getting raped? I do agree that people should try not to rape each other, but this whole business about rape receiving special attention is silly. The 40000 number you cite is all people dieing in Norway. Probably a very little proportion of them actually "gets killled". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate111 victims of intentional homicide in 2011 Even that is a crazy outlier. 77 of those were killed by the same person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statisticsvs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rateHomicide rate per 100,000 is ~6.9 Rape rate per 100,000 is ~14.75 Not sure where you get those numbers. On the wiki pages, I find 35 or 20 for rape in Norway and 2.2 for homicides. Global average, oops Singling out Norway made little sense except for a bunch of poster's examples
Used Norway because some claimed rape was only a problem in third world countries and its where im from.
You couldent temp ban me or something? Im getting a bit angrier at this then i should.
|
Let me clarify why it sounds offensive, im not bashing Kas here, im aware that he recognized his mistake and apologized.
-Women can sensitive about rape jokes because most of them are familiar with different degrees of sexual harassment from either personal experience or others experience (from close people) that they can obviously relate to very well.
-Its natural to use words like "crushing", "killing" or "beating" in a war game. that is what is depicted in game. But if you choose "rape" instead specifically when adressing a woman, then we cannot help asking why you choose that word.
-He said "rape some girl" which highlights the fact that he choosed the word rape because he would play a woman. That can be offensive by the reason stated above, but its also discrimination.
edit: Thank you for breaking my overly serious tone Hendralisk XD
|
|
|
On November 22 2014 15:58 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:53 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:43 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:39 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:31 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:29 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:25 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:23 ddayzy wrote:On November 22 2014 15:14 Pangpootata wrote:On November 22 2014 15:13 ddayzy wrote:
[quote]
Im sorry, your argument is that more people die then woman get raped so its ok to tell woman you will rape them?
No. I'm saying that telling people you will kill them is more serious then telling people you will rape them. So if people don't get banned for telling people you will kill them, they shouldn't be banned for saying the same thing about rape. It's a matter of simple logical consistency, If you told someone who had to live daily with the fear of being killed that you would kill them, and if the person saying he would kill you belonged to the group who had a history of killing people like you I would have reacted just as strongly. Also you do realize nobody have commited a crime? The argument is simply, do you think its ok to tell woman ypu will rape them? If i went over to your girlfriend and told her i would rape her you would tell her its no big deal because being killed is worse then being raped? No it wouldn't be fine. But it would be much worse if you went up to her and told her you were going to kill her. Still don't get the point? Yes i do, you are agreeing that you should not tell woman you will rape them. Case closed. Now if you want to campaign for banning people for saying they will kill a oponent who is fearing for his life go ahead. I dont think you will meet much tesistance. Case is not closed yet. Players are banned for talking about rape, but not banned for talking about killing an opponent. Since Kill > rape, either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. One person got disqualified from one tournament for telling a girl he was gonna rep her. You are still drawing a false equivilant. Sexual harrassment is something most woman experience in one form or anorher. Most people dont live in fear of being killed. If one person did and someone said they was going to kill him i would suport him getting disqualified from a tournamen as well. Now you tell me where this happened? Its also peculiar that you defend something you admit to being wrong because you think something worse is being accepted. Wouldent it be better to fight to get this thing that is worse banned as well? Insted of saying something you think is wrong should be allowed? Surely if we find a low point we shouldent try to sink every other standar to it but try to raise the low point insted? Yeap, that's why I said either unban those who joke about rape or ban those who joke about killing, to maintain consistency. But to me, regardless of whether a high or low standard is chosen, logical consistency is more important. Edit: Regarding the point about fear, I already gave an example. More people live in fear of getting hit (since it's more common) than getting rape. So would this mean that threatening to hit someone is worse than threatening to rape someone? Again it goes back to the point about consistency. It's best to either ban all jokes about crimes, or allow all, instead of doing things arbitrarily based on feelings. What? What you are saying makes no sense at all. I give up. I allready told you, find me one example of a guy fearing for his life that gets told that he will be killed by someone and i will support disqualifying tbat person from a starcraft tournament. I would strongly disagree with hitting being more common then sexual harrassment based on any given night on the town. That you even manage to compare all the sexual bs they have to take from guys to someone being afraid of being hit is amazing. 1) Do you think maddelisk really feared that Kas would rape her? 1) sexual harassment =/= rape. Please stop.
No, what im saying is that sexual harrassment is something most woman will have to deal with in their life, in that context someone telling you they will rape you, joke or not, might not be so funny. There is no equal context for murder.
Nobody has said sexual harrassment is the same as rape. But unless you think one is ok, mind you everything that is not vaginal penetration gets classified as sexual harrassment, i fail to see your point.
|
-He said "rape some girl" which highlights the fact that he choosed the word rape because he would play a woman. That can be offensive by the reason stated above, but its also discrimination.
This.
|
On November 22 2014 15:57 vult wrote:
This thread is out of control.
Also Community News-worthy? I dunno Kev.
Haha, didn't notice Community News. Wtf TL :D
On November 22 2014 16:06 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +-He said "rape some girl" which highlights the fact that he choosed the word rape because he would play a woman. That can be offensive by the reason stated above, but its also discrimination. This.
I precisely think he didn't make the unfortunate link between "rape" and "girl" in his head. He would have said "time to rape some gold leaguer" all the same if he had had to play a newbie. I still think that he just doesn't speak English well enough to have realized what he said.
If he did intentionally make that connection, well he's worse than I thought. Nothing to redeem really. Because for me making that connection is equivalent to stripping "rape" of its gaming slang sense.
|
|
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On November 22 2014 16:10 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2014 15:57 vult wrote:
This thread is out of control.
Also Community News-worthy? I dunno Kev. Haha, didn't notice Community News. Wtf TL :D
well, the issue was newsworthy
the discussion thereafter is a travesty
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Locking this because some people simply cannot discuss this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tZOS8.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XujHL.gif)
