|
United States5162 Posts
On May 05 2012 02:42 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:36 Myles wrote:
I just don't get why this became as issue all of a sudden. It's not like Destiny's behavior wasn't like this from the beginning. It wasn't "all of a sudden". It's come up tons of times before. It's just that this time, it was the catalyst for a reaction from Destiny that got him banned for actions on TL. Add in that people realized after the Orb thing that consumers actually have some power in the market, and all of a sudden something happened. I do think it's hysterical that there are actually people who seem to think he's somehow taking the moral high ground by refusing to fix his reprehensible behavior though.
I know this has come up before, it just seemed like people were over it and just accepted that was who Destiny is. With Orb it wasn't a common thing to see him using racial slurs and such.
And Destiny completely deserved to get banned even if I do think there's some legitimacy to the double standard applied to racial slurs. He's certainly no white knight defending free speech and the 'evolution' of language. He uses slurs to get a rise out of people then laughs and calls THEM hypocrites when they do. Sadly, a lot of people like to see that kind of stuff.
|
I dream for a future with a community based on mutual respect and equality of ideas.
|
On May 05 2012 02:54 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:42 JingleHell wrote:On May 05 2012 02:36 Myles wrote:
I just don't get why this became as issue all of a sudden. It's not like Destiny's behavior wasn't like this from the beginning. It wasn't "all of a sudden". It's come up tons of times before. It's just that this time, it was the catalyst for a reaction from Destiny that got him banned for actions on TL. Add in that people realized after the Orb thing that consumers actually have some power in the market, and all of a sudden something happened. I do think it's hysterical that there are actually people who seem to think he's somehow taking the moral high ground by refusing to fix his reprehensible behavior though. I know this has come up before, it just seemed like people were over it and just accepted that was who Destiny is. With Orb it wasn't a common thing to see him using racial slurs and such. And Destiny completely deserved to get banned even if I do think there's some legitimacy to the double standard applied to racial slurs. He's certainly no white knight defending free speech and the 'evolution' of language. He uses slurs to get a rise out of people then laughs and calls THEM hypocrites when they do. Sadly, a lot of people like to see that kind of stuff.
I think if people want to go after double standards, they need to consider all the ramifications, separate it from attempting to defend Destiny, do it later when things have calmed down some, and put together a solid, rational argument for it.
The double standard argument, in this situation, mostly looks like a bad excuse to attack TL in defense of Destiny. Even if there are some people who legitimately aren't doing that, the way they're going about it, right now, makes it look that way.
And given that the double standard has protected him from moderation on multiple occasions due to his popularity getting him an exception on self promotion, it's a silly argument to bring up where he's concerned in the first place.
On May 05 2012 03:05 sirachman wrote:
I dream for a future with a community based on mutual respect and equality of ideas.
Mutual respect... I assume you don't expect it to include any members of the human race, if you mean an online community.
Equality of ideas? Not all ideas are equal. Sorry. Some ideas are stupid, some are wrong, some are good, some are bad.
The holocaust had a lot of it's roots in eugenics, which can sound like a reasonably cool idea. Anyways, what idea are you hoping would get more credit than it currently does?
|
The arguments on tl regarding this topic are insane.
I honestly can't see how one can argue that it's acceptable behavior. While I spit the word faggot and many other potentially 'racist offensive' words regularly, that is within a given context which I deem acceptable. And, as I understand, Destiny feels he is within right to call someone a gook, in that context, and the following consequences are a gross mistreatment.
What I don't understand, is how someone can reach this conclusion, based on the argument that words can be said, but have no meaning, or 'weight' to them, IN THE CONTEXT DESTINY IS IN. He has thousands of people watching. Chances are, a large proportion of those are Asian. The word 'gook' was said in a manner that would be no different to a white person calling a black person a nigger (offensively). It is beyond clear that destiny's intent was to offend his opponent, having been all inn-ed, and the word 'faggot' was(is?) no longer a sufficient insult to display his frustration. Impulsive, of course, which I understand very well as I share the same rage response as he does. In fact, I am much worse - I tell people to kill themselves, get cancer etc etc. I am that guy. However, I don't have 5000 people watching me, those of which who potentially have had an experience relating to my insult - whether it be a loved one with cancer, or an experience with suicide or suicidal tendencies, or an experience where you have been explicitly attacked for the sole reason of being a particular race.
The viewer count, is what makes desinty's actions completely unacceptable in my opinion at least. While I agree that the action itself is generally unacceptable anyway, destiny's repercussions given his context are deserved. Making the argument that people should just 'man-up' because 'they are just words' is a massive cop out, and is harmful to any community. Whether Destiny likes it or not, or wants to be or not, by having thousands of viewers and sponsors - those that provide his INCOME, he is RESPONSIBLE for his actions. As far as I can tell, he just sounds like a teenager, blaming the 'flaws and hypocrisies of society' for him not being able to control his temper.
Deep down, I'm sure he knows that given a second chance, he wouldn't call him a gook and would just stick to faggot. Because he isn't racist, but he is by all means arrogant and insensitive to those he may potentially offend, and that is more than enough reason to be dropped from a team and banned from TL for 30 days.
The guy really just needs to grow up, and stop playing the victim. If he had the insight he claims he does, he would understand that society is the way it is and some people - good people, would be genuinely offended by that racial slur - ALBEIT AN IRRATIONAL RESPONSE. It's kind of like {EDIT: fail analogy here}. Thatz just the way it is.
|
run.at.me:
You might want to add a disclaimer there at the end, that you're not comparing being offended by racism to having downs. It's pretty obvious in context that's not what you mean, but given the knee-jerk TL;DR nature of a lot of stuff regarding Destiny right now, it might be safer.
Unless of course, you actually WERE making that comparison and were trying to be subtle about it. In which case, feel free to not add the disclaimer.
|
On May 05 2012 02:42 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 02:36 Myles wrote:
I just don't get why this became as issue all of a sudden. It's not like Destiny's behavior wasn't like this from the beginning. It wasn't "all of a sudden". It's come up tons of times before. It's just that this time, it was the catalyst for a reaction from Destiny that got him banned for actions on TL. Add in that people realized after the Orb thing that consumers actually have some power in the market, and all of a sudden something happened. I do think it's hysterical that there are actually people who seem to think he's somehow taking the moral high ground by refusing to fix his reprehensible behavior though.
It wouldn't have been that big of a deal if Destiny would have apologized instead of insulting tlstaff/ fuel the fire. he digged his own grave and still does tt
|
At least TL is a fun source of drama. But it does make you think. I have to say I'm more convinced of Destiny's rationale so far though. You don't seem to explicitly argue this point, but I wanted to comment on it.
Now let's get complicated. Some words are MORE offensive than others. Yes, every person has their own sliding scale, as we've seen a million times over lately. For some people, certain words aren't offensive. Well, guess what, that means YOU don't take offense at those words. Cookie?
Cookie  . But you do have limits right - I mean there are people who could be very sensitive and who are intensely offended by any disparaging commentary; it doesn't have to be a racial slur. Would you say that, because racial slurs generally offend more people, more deeply than other words might (i.e. calling something/someone gay, retarded, etc.), that the usage of those words should not be used? Or should all potentially offensive words not be used (including gay, retarded)?
There are so many unanswered questions in my mind. To what extent does the original definition of a word really matter? To what extent did Destiny's actions actually offend people, and how many people? How many people truly believe context is irrelevant - and are inflicted with deep pain if they see a word written randomly, by itself in an open space? If the way he uses racial slurs has the potential to be offensive, then can't that same argument apply to countless other special circumstances where there are unique individuals who are uniquely offended by certain things - or does it not matter when the number of people who could be offended are small?
This really seems like an all or nothing proposition. If people really care about moral values, and in principle its about ensuring no one is offended, then they have to be a lot more serious in general. We can't use any disparaging terms, there can be no rage/anger to prevent hurting sensitive gamers, and obviously no racism, no sexist commentary, or homophobic words being used no matter how jokingly.
At times it makes me think, what is the standard that we should be appealing to. Should it be absolute, not using terms that could offend anyone? Should it be, lets not use terms that offend a large number of people deeply, but allow terms that offend a minority deeply? Or should all terms be allowed, but context highlighted as the distinguishing factor between intentional and unintentional insults. Personally I think the last option is best - because anything else is either extreme (the first option) or a double standard (the second).
Anyway...I might not come back to this as its pretty scary to read some people's negative responses (I am pretty sensitive), but damn it I get addicted to typing in responses on TL for some reason lol. Thought I would just post my impressions
|
Context is king; there is a big difference between using a word, and actually meaning to be defamatory or derogatory with it. I've seen it here more than any other online community I've been part of, and that's this idea that people are somehow morally superior because they whine about the use of a word.
I've never seen so many thin-skinned people that aren't even part of the group/ethnicity/etc... being "insulted." They just like to announce their upstanding ethical nature to pump themselves up, and to protect something that they aren't even part of. Like many people have expressed on this website, even if my group/ethnicity was to be used in a negative way, it won't bother me cause I'm bigger than that.
Whether you want to believe they meant what they said or not, choosing to be offended doesn't accomplish anything other than showcasing your mental weakness. The thing we used to all be taught as kids (sticks and stones) seems to have evaporated in this online realm and that worries me. Are we breeding a psychologically weak generation bent on complaining their way to things?
And sure, TL can run their website however they want, but if there isn't consistency, you can bet people will be all over that. If TL is projecting itself to be a certain place where rules and actions are upheld, and they only follow through some of the time, it breaks down this notion that they are operating in a certain way. It also reeks of favortism and an individual attack on the very person that they dish punishment out to.
|
Jesus christ this thing has inflated and gone WAY too far.
|
On May 05 2012 04:29 radscorpion9 wrote:At least TL is a fun source of drama. But it does make you think. I have to say I'm more convinced of Destiny's rationale so far though. You don't seem to explicitly argue this point, but I wanted to comment on it. Show nested quote +Now let's get complicated. Some words are MORE offensive than others. Yes, every person has their own sliding scale, as we've seen a million times over lately. For some people, certain words aren't offensive. Well, guess what, that means YOU don't take offense at those words. Cookie? Cookie . But you do have limits right - I mean there are people who could be very sensitive and who are intensely offended by any disparaging commentary; it doesn't have to be a racial slur. Would you say that, because racial slurs generally offend more people, more deeply than other words might (i.e. calling something/someone gay, retarded, etc.), that the usage of those words should not be used? Or should all potentially offensive words not be used (including gay, retarded)? There are so many unanswered questions in my mind. To what extent does the original definition of a word really matter? To what extent did Destiny's actions actually offend people, and how many people? How many people truly believe context is irrelevant - and are inflicted with deep pain if they see a word written randomly, by itself in an open space? If the way he uses racial slurs has the potential to be offensive, then can't that same argument apply to countless other special circumstances where there are unique individuals who are uniquely offended by certain things - or does it not matter when the number of people who could be offended are small? This really seems like an all or nothing proposition. If people really care about moral values, and in principle its about ensuring no one is offended, then they have to be a lot more serious in general. We can't use any disparaging terms, there can be no rage/anger to prevent hurting sensitive gamers, and obviously no racism, no sexist commentary, or homophobic words being used no matter how jokingly. At times it makes me think, what is the standard that we should be appealing to. Should it be absolute, not using terms that could offend anyone? Should it be, lets not use terms that offend a large number of people deeply, but allow terms that offend a minority deeply? Or should all terms be allowed, but context highlighted as the distinguishing factor between intentional and unintentional insults. Personally I think the last option is best - because anything else is either extreme (the first option) or a double standard (the second). Anyway...I might not come back to this as its pretty scary to read some people's negative responses (I am pretty sensitive), but damn it I get addicted to typing in responses on TL for some reason lol. Thought I would just post my impressions
Remember the scene in Die Hard 3 where Bruce Willis is in Harlem wearing a sign that says "I hate niggers"? I kinda envision saying "gook" on a stream featured on TL as being similar. Now imagine if, instead of explaining to the one guy who wasn't about to stab him, Bruce Willis had spit in that dude's face and kicked him in the balls, for the horrendous offense of trying to help him get his ass out of the situation?
That's what Destiny did by raging at Intrigue.
Like I said in some of my earlier replies, Destiny can say whatever he wants on his stream. But TL can feature or unfeature whatever stream they want.
But if you're going to attempt to entertain by giving offense, you should be ready to deal with the backlash. And if you try to deal with the backlash on a site that's not under your control, you should follow their rules. Seems simple to me.
On May 05 2012 04:45 divito wrote:
Context is king; there is a big difference between using a word, and actually meaning to be defamatory or derogatory with it. I've seen it here more than any other online community I've been part of, and that's this idea that people are somehow morally superior because they whine about the use of a word.
I've never seen so many thin-skinned people that aren't even part of the group/ethnicity/etc... being "insulted." They just like to announce their upstanding ethical nature to pump themselves up, and to protect something that they aren't even part of. Like many people have expressed on this website, even if my group/ethnicity was to be used in a negative way, it won't bother me cause I'm bigger than that.
Whether you want to believe they meant what they said or not, choosing to be offended doesn't accomplish anything other than showcasing your mental weakness. The thing we used to all be taught as kids (sticks and stones) seems to have evaporated in this online realm and that worries me. Are we breeding a psychologically weak generation bent on complaining their way to things?
And sure, TL can run their website however they want, but if there isn't consistency, you can bet people will be all over that. If TL is projecting itself to be a certain place where rules and actions are upheld, and they only follow through some of the time, it breaks down this notion that they are operating in a certain way. It also reeks of favortism and an individual attack on the very person that they dish punishment out to.
Fine. Here's some context. I just lost a game. I'm mad at the way I just lost the game. I call my opponent a word with zero polite definition. Clearly, in that context, I'm saying I want that other person to father my children, right? Yeah, whatever.
|
On May 05 2012 05:12 JingleHell wrote:
Fine. Here's some context. I just lost a game. I'm mad at the way I just lost the game. I call my opponent a word with zero polite definition. Clearly, in that context, I'm saying I want that other person to father my children, right? Yeah, whatever.
If I'm your opponent, I understand that you're upset because you lost. Your ability to know anything about me and make a generalization doesn't mean that your message was sincere. I'd have to be living in a bubble to have a problem with that.
Whether you say "Cheeser!" or "Bastard!" or "Nigger!" doesn't really change anything based on which you use, you're still dealing with your frustration; that's the point of context. There would have to be a diatribe of conversation to identify real hate speech, and not just one word appearing on my screen, especially not after a loss.
|
JingleHell has a good head on his shoulders. Couldn't agree more with how you laid it out.
|
On May 05 2012 05:18 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:12 JingleHell wrote:
Fine. Here's some context. I just lost a game. I'm mad at the way I just lost the game. I call my opponent a word with zero polite definition. Clearly, in that context, I'm saying I want that other person to father my children, right? Yeah, whatever. If I'm your opponent, I understand that you're upset because you lost. Your ability to know anything about me and make a generalization doesn't mean that your message was sincere. I'd have to be living in a bubble to have a problem with that.
Or, if you've ever had any kind of hate speech directed at you, you'd be offended at the mentality behind use of any of it.
You'd have to be living in a bubble to not understand that.
All the accusations of thin skin, on behalf of someone else who spent days raging about TL because of his ban/defeature, smack of irony anyways.
|
On May 05 2012 05:21 JingleHell wrote:
Or, if you've ever had any kind of hate speech directed at you, you'd be offended at the mentality behind use of any of it.
I've had plenty (while I'm not one of the usual suspects), and I still don't agree with taking offence to it and never have. It doesn't help me, and only means I'm psychologically weak. We were taught as kids the simple idiom of "sticks and stones;" you can't tell me that children have higher tolerance than an adolescent or adult. That's a really scary proposition for our future generations.
|
|
|
On May 05 2012 05:31 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:21 JingleHell wrote:
Or, if you've ever had any kind of hate speech directed at you, you'd be offended at the mentality behind use of any of it.
I've had plenty (while I'm not one of the usual suspects), and I still don't agree with taking offence to it and never have. It doesn't help me, and only means I'm psychologically weak. We were taught as kids the simple idiom of "sticks and stones;" you can't tell me that children have higher tolerance than an adolescent or adult. That's a really scary proposition for our future generations.
I'd expect that a need to portray a tough outward appearance at all times is more likely to be a sign of serious mental issues than taking offense at something that has nothing BUT offensive connotations.
Besides, sticks and stones, right? So why is Destiny so offended that people call him a racist? The word doesn't mean anything, so why does he care? Why does he try to argue the point? Why does he rage and insult people? Why do sponsors care about those words? Sticks and stones, man! Totally not offensive.
|
JingleHell, I don't think that people take issue with Destiny's ban from TL. I think what's really annoying people is the go to the sponsors right away sort of thing.
|
On May 05 2012 05:50 Zorkmid wrote:
JingleHell, I don't think that people take issue with Destiny's ban from TL. I think what's really annoying people is the go to the sponsors right away sort of thing.
Quite a few do, actually, from what I've seen. Tons of people are screaming for various people's heads on platters because of the double standard.
Yeah, it might be slightly lame to go to sponsors before going to teams, but then, when the first thread about it was full of ranting about how Quantic doesn't care what Destiny does on his stream because it's his stream, then if you want to do something about it, maybe leaning on the sponsors is the best bet.
Now I do somewhat agree that going to sponsors before teams is kinda going overboard, but that's probably been 10% or less of the rage related to this that I've seen. Most of it is about TL's double standards, or the community's double standard, or various other screaming that mostly boils down to Destiny fans being very pissed that they saw a downside to toxic behavior.
|
On May 05 2012 05:37 JingleHell wrote:
I'd expect that a need to portray a tough outward appearance at all times is more likely to be a sign of serious mental issues than taking offense at something that has nothing BUT offensive connotations.
It's not toughness to be dismissive of someone's ignorance, at least in my opinion. That's generally all that insults and hate speech are anyway. It's a coping mechanism for whatever is ailing them; and to me, being a white knight is just as much a mechanism for something deeper.
On May 05 2012 05:37 JingleHell wrote:
Besides, sticks and stones, right? So why is Destiny so offended that people call him a racist? The word doesn't mean anything, so why does he care? Why does he try to argue the point? Why does he rage and insult people? Why do sponsors care about those words? Sticks and stones, man! Totally not offensive.
I wouldn't necessarily call that analogous. He would probably view it as libellous or slanderous and being spoken as fact; whereas use of the word nigger, gook, wop, all apply to actual ethnicities. I'm splitting hairs, but I don't like the situation in any sense really.
Sponsors will back whatever the majority of their audience/customers back. This has been seen in lots of different industries and markets. It's definitely not something I agree with, but they're primary motive is profit and if they see their action as protecting the bigger group that has the potential to increase their revenue, they will do it.
And just to put it out there, while I understand the use of sarcasm and the way you've presented your argument, I bear no ill will towards you or your ideas and don't take your stance personally. We're having a decently spirited debate.
|
On May 05 2012 06:23 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:37 JingleHell wrote:
I'd expect that a need to portray a tough outward appearance at all times is more likely to be a sign of serious mental issues than taking offense at something that has nothing BUT offensive connotations. It's not toughness to be dismissive of someone's ignorance, at least in my opinion. That's generally all that insults and hate speech are anyway. It's a coping mechanism for whatever is ailing them; and to me, being a white knight is just as much a mechanism for something deeper. Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:37 JingleHell wrote:
Besides, sticks and stones, right? So why is Destiny so offended that people call him a racist? The word doesn't mean anything, so why does he care? Why does he try to argue the point? Why does he rage and insult people? Why do sponsors care about those words? Sticks and stones, man! Totally not offensive.
I wouldn't necessarily call that analogous. He would probably view it as libellous or slanderous and being spoken as fact; whereas use of the word nigger, gook, wop, all apply to actual ethnicities. I'm splitting hairs, but I don't like the situation in any sense really. Sponsors will back whatever the majority of their audience/customers back. This has been seen in lots of different industries and markets. It's definitely not something I agree with, but they're primary motive is profit and if they see their action as protecting the bigger group that has the potential to increase their revenue, they will do it. And just to put it out there, while I understand the use of sarcasm and the way you've presented your argument, I bear no ill will towards you or your ideas and don't take your stance personally. We're having a decently spirited debate.
I think you'd have a VERY hard time proving slander or libel regarding people accusing him of racism. He certainly spews enough racist rhetoric to convince people of it.
I'd say the difference between playing white knight in a potentially negative way, and having a serious issue with ignorant hate speech comes down to why you dislike it. I think throughout this blog and replies, I've listed enough reasons for people to not want him to spew that filth, all legitimate.
Use of racial slurs is WORSE than calling someone who uses them racist, clearly. Even if he isn't, he provides people a legitimate reason to believe it. It's easy enough to assume that the reason he says it's not racism is merely not having the moral fiber to stand up and take responsibility for the filth that falls out of his mouth. (Or being afraid of getting his ass kicked, also plausible.)
As for the sponsors reaction? Well, clearly enough people have a problem with that kind of speech that they consider the better bottom line to come from taking a stand against it. Maybe people should wonder WHY so many people are against it. It's not like the people who don't like hate speech are some tiny vocal minority, obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
