[MP-Ryan]

In short, judge people not by words they use, but by the meaning behind them.

The point that I've been making throughout is that it is impossible to separate the two.  Failing to acknowledge that reality is a failure to communicate meaning.

[Dragon]

It's indeed impossible to separate the two, but it should be acknowledged that sometimes words may have two meanings, and that words change meanings over time. This happens much faster than it used to, due to internet, but the basic mechanic is the same. IMO, "rape" may be used in this new meaning, since it's common enough not to cause misunderstandings. That's how other people speak, and language is one place where this is a valid justification. If everybody spoke differently, we wouldn't be able to communicate at all.

[General Battuta]

It's indeed impossible to separate the two, but it should be acknowledged that sometimes words may have two meanings, and that words change meanings over time. This happens much faster than it used to, due to internet, but the basic mechanic is the same. IMO, "rape" may be used in this new meaning, since it's common enough not to cause misunderstandings. That's how other people speak, and language is one place where this is a valid justification. If everybody spoke differently, we wouldn't be able to communicate at all.

I think this is an attitude you could only take if women have been given no voice in your decision.

The behavior of a bunch of male teenagers playing games on the internet does not a linguistic shift make. 'Slut' is not a compliment yet, 'nigger' is not a term of endearment, and '*****' is not a genderless word. The mind does not operate by simple logical rules; associations and heuristic connections are the norm. 'Rape' is tied to women - we can measure this in the lab.

[Polpolion]

You're right, the Internet is a great safe haven. But should it only be a safe haven for you? What about people who are made to feel unsafe by casual rapechat? If you don't want to care about the emotions or sensitivities of others, why should we care about your desire to vent?

I don't think you're an asshole and I'm sorry you think I'm one. I really enjoyed the time I spent with your project and I always wanted to do more.

the internet isn't one homogeneous place. places like hlp enforce rules that make you respect your peers. places like 4chan give you more latitude with what you say, but there you need to understand that people might not be so nice. personally I'd say both places are valuable in their own way. if you're not comfortable with places where people can say what they feel then you're supposed to avoid 4chan, not try and change what it fundamentally is supposed to be.

[Sushi]

3.  It does not subvert the original meaning of the term or minimize it.

I agree with your other points, but I take issue with this one. Of course it reduces the impact of the original meaning. Hyperbole, used often enough, always does.

[MP-Ryan]

It's indeed impossible to separate the two, but it should be acknowledged that sometimes words may have two meanings, and that words change meanings over time. This happens much faster than it used to, due to internet, but the basic mechanic is the same. IMO, "rape" may be used in this new meaning, since it's common enough not to cause misunderstandings. That's how other people speak, and language is one place where this is a valid justification. If everybody spoke differently, we wouldn't be able to communicate at all.

Please read the posts on pages 2 and 3 regarding the subversion of language to convey politicized meaning, and we can take this up again.  Then skip below the break.

---BREAK---

Just because a usage has become common doesn't mean it should be considered acceptable.  While you're thinking on this, feel free to comment on the following common, subverted, terms or phrases:

"That's so gay."
"That's Jewish."
"That's retarded."

You can hear these things in a high school or college hallway virtually daily.  Does that make the usage acceptable?  What meaning is being conveyed when someone replaces the word "stupid" with a word that describes a particular identifiable group of people?  What does conveying the meaning "stupid" in this way cause one to think about the person making the statement?

[MP-Ryan]

3.  It does not subvert the original meaning of the term or minimize it.

I agree with your other points, but I take issue with this one. Of course it reduces the impact of the original meaning. Hyperbole, used often enough, always does.

Fair point.  Perhaps I should have said "belittles" rather than "minimize."

[Quanto]

You're right, the Internet is a great safe haven. But should it only be a safe haven for you? What about people who are made to feel unsafe by casual rapechat? If you don't want to care about the emotions or sensitivities of others, why should we care about your desire to vent?

I don't think you're an asshole and I'm sorry you think I'm one. I really enjoyed the time I spent with your project and I always wanted to do more.

Oh I'll get over it in a few hours, hopefully you will too.
I'm not so much opposed to the concept of people needing to be more sensitive, but I also live by the philosophy of "Live and Let Live". I see stuff I disagree with all the time, but I don't bother people about it, or even contemplate doing anything to prevent it in the future. I start to take issue with things when others refuse to let others live as they do. Now I know this whole tangent can lead to a slippery slope, but in general, if one individual's lifestyle does not adversely and physically affect the lifestyle of another, then leave be.
You may ask "Well, what if one lifestyle leads to the EVENTUAL disruption of another?" I would say that such predictions can be made, and some may prove correct, but at the same time, I am willing to live with the risk. I have work in half an hour so you guys will have free reign to pick it apart as you will.

[Scotty]

at the same time, I am willing to live with the risk.

I would be willing to bet money that this is because none or very few of these risks will ever include you (and, very probably, most people) to the same extent they do, you know, the people who are actually in a position for this risk to hurt them.  Or have already had it hurt them.

[Quanto]

at the same time, I am willing to live with the risk.

I would be willing to bet money that this is because none or very few of these risks will ever include you (and, very probably, most people) to the same extent they do, you know, the people who are actually in a position for this risk to hurt them.  Or have already had it hurt them.

That was the flipside of my argument. The risk is there. Who knows, I could get hit by a drunk driver tomorrow. But I won't let it bother me. I certainly won't let talk about drunk driving bother me.

[StarSlayer]

There is an interesting exercise we did in one of my college classes.  Essentially the instructor asked the men what they do when they go to their car in a college parking lot at night.  The most common response was "I walk to my car and get into it."  The instructor then asked the women the same question.  Nearly everyone of them described a set of steps as detailed as a Tactical Police Unit making a raid in the worst part of town imaginable.  Note this level of caution was necessary to them at a very nice college in a pretty well to do town, let alone someplace less secure.  So no, in all reality this is a very clear and realistic threat that most women take very seriously.  Its easy to dismiss as out of hand when its not something you need to worry about routinely in everyday situations.

Just because you are able take something for granted doesn't mean everyone else has the luxury of being so cavalier.

[General Battuta]

There is an interesting exercise we did in one of my college classes.  Essentially the instructor asked the men what they do when they go to their car in a college parking lot at night.  The most common response was "I walk to my car and get into it."  The instructor then asked the women the same question.  Nearly everyone of them described a set of steps as detailed as a Tactical Police Unit making a raid in the worst part of town imaginable.  Note this level of caution was necessary to them at a very nice college in a pretty well to do town, let alone someplace less secure.  So no, in all reality this is a very clear and realistic threat that most women take very seriously.  Its easy to dismiss as out of hand when its not something you need to worry about routinely in everyday situations.

Just because you are able take something for granted doesn't mean everyone else has the luxury of being so cavalier.

There's a creepy-looking bald dude who stands outside the house next to my apartment. He's the staring sort. I can just walk past him, but he's big enough - and possibly dangerous enough - that women in the block send a tough friend out the door first to see where he's standing and signal a safe route around.

This is just day-to-day procedure for walking out the front door. Necessary to go buy groceries or get a coffee or whatever. And just being with someone who feels this is necessary is enough to get me keyed up and anxious.

[Grizzly]

There is a point I wanted to make in this thread. Trashman said something about that rape could not be worse then murder.

The thing is, if I got raped, I'd probably have problems with that later on.
If I get murdered, I won't. Because I am dead. I won't even have to worry about anything at all.

Therefore, getting murdered is actually the best thing that can happen to you.

[TrashMan]

It's indeed impossible to separate the two, but it should be acknowledged that sometimes words may have two meanings, and that words change meanings over time. This happens much faster than it used to, due to internet, but the basic mechanic is the same. IMO, "rape" may be used in this new meaning, since it's common enough not to cause misunderstandings. That's how other people speak, and language is one place where this is a valid justification. If everybody spoke differently, we wouldn't be able to communicate at all.

I think this is an attitude you could only take if women have been given no voice in your decision.

The behavior of a bunch of male teenagers playing games on the internet does not a linguistic shift make. 'Slut' is not a compliment yet, 'nigger' is not a term of endearment, and '*****' is not a genderless word. The mind does not operate by simple logical rules; associations and heuristic connections are the norm. 'Rape' is tied to women - we can measure this in the lab.

The world does not operate by logical rules either. No one can dictate in which way the vocabulary and word usagage goes. It just does. Who knows, one day nigger may be a pretty cool word to use again. Connotations to words are given by circumstances. Words in themsevels have no meaning other than what we give them; no emotional attachment other than we put into it.
After all, nigger comes from negro, which is a discriptive term.
In it's essence it's not different than saying "black man" or "white man" (neither of whihc I consider the slightest insulting.)
It's who the word was used by (slave owners and racists) that caused it's negative connotations, but those can only go away if we let them.


And if people voted on usage of words, you'd have wars sprouting up. Different groups with different interests.

I don't see usage of the word rape (as mentioned in this topic) as "lack of respect for your peers". I see it as just another word in the vocabulary. And it is.

[TrashMan]

trashman how can you not fit the idea that this is not a suffering contest into your head? you don't need to be the sole survivor in a rabid baby-eating kitten-killing cannibal attack to have your feelings hurt. it takes remarkably little effort to avoid using words pejoratively, which can go a long way towards making people feel welcome. if you don't feel that you should ever consider other people's feelings before you speak then you are going to have a hard time justifying your presence in any kind of social setting.

What suffering? I have no idea what you're talkign about.

Also, I do consider other peoples feelings...up to point. Polite and cortious? Easily done. But I draw the line at walking on eggshells around over-sensitive people.
The sooner people learn to deal wiht such small dissapoinments, the better.

[TrashMan]

So, are there any hyperboles involving victimization we can use in a... let's call it "mature"... conversation?

Hyperbole is a feature of casual speech, and no one is going to judge someone for getting hyped up about a particular issue if its in context.  Let me detour back to something TrashMan raised and I missed a moment ago:

So how is "my team got murdered" any better?

1.  It's denotatively correct (depending on the game).
2.  It carries no additional connotative or politicized meaning.
3.  It does not subvert the original meaning of the term or minimize it.
4.  There is no culture of acceptability around murder - it's one of the universally condemned features of human morality (one of the reasons that justified homicide is not called justified murder, in point of fact).
5.  Unlike 'rape,' 'that's so gay,' 'that's retarded,' etc, murder carries no baggage regarding gender, orientation, ability, or race.  It's a universal affliction.

1. So is rape. Comparions and meaning make sense.
2. Sez you.
3. Neither does rape.
4. And rape is acceptalbe? Since when?
5. So is rape. It's not exclusive for women, yet women exclusively identify with it...And that's really not my problem.

[TrashMan]

There is a point I wanted to make in this thread. Trashman said something about that rape could not be worse then murder.

The thing is, if I got raped, I'd probably have problems with that later on.
If I get murdered, I won't. Because I am dead. I won't even have to worry about anything at all.

Therefore, getting murdered is actually the best thing that can happen to you.

What about your faimily?
Or what if you go to hell? You just got cheated out of X more years of life!

Or..what about torture? Since it can include inserting object in places you dont' want them to be? and it can last for days, weeks? It can break you 100 tiems worse than any rape ever could.
Does that mean we shoudl never use phrases like "When's the next patch? This is pure torture!" ..because.. you know..lot's of soldiers in the world. I bet some survied torture and use internet.

[Polpolion]

I don't see usage of the word rape (as mentioned in this topic) as "lack of respect for your peers". I see it as just another word in the vocabulary. And it is.

sensitivity and respect is never about how the speaker sees the words. it's about how the listeners see the words.

What suffering? I have no idea what you're talkign about.

Also, I do consider other peoples feelings...up to point. Polite and cortious? Easily done. But I draw the line at walking on eggshells around over-sensitive people.
The sooner people learn to deal wiht such small dissapoinments, the better.

on frequent occasions you drew parallels between rape and murder. I honestly have no idea why you were doing that, so I pointed out that it doesn't matter how much people are hurt - they have a right to feel hurt.

sensitivity is an ill-defined term. I agree with you, to hell with over sensitive people, but quite frankly I don't think either of us are  qualified to tell when someone is being over-sensitive. in face of that doubt, personally I'd rather humor the person and get them out of my hair unless I'm feeling exceptionally malevolent.

1. So is rape. Comparions and meaning make sense.
2. Sez you.
3. Neither does rape.
4. And rape is acceptalbe? Since when?
5. So is rape. It's not exclusive for women, yet women exclusively identify with it...And that's really not my problem.

1) why the hell are you playing games where you rape people what on earth is wrong with you
2) i'm inclined to trust mp-ryan
3) yes it does, again, unless you're literally raping someone
4) there's lots of gray area around what rape defined as. too lazy to get into it now.
5) no, like battuta mentioned, people typically associate rape with women. apparently he knows of lab studies that have shown this. ask him for more details

will post more later

[General Battuta]

People other than women definitely get raped, and it's equally morally repugnant.

But, uh, I think the best thing to do here is just...leave TrashMan be. I'm not sure posting more later (in dialogue with that quad post) is a good idea. This has been a great discussion as long as that material stays compartmentalized, and the best way to do that is just to disregard.

[MP-Ryan]

1.  It's denotatively correct (depending on the game).
2.  It carries no additional connotative or politicized meaning.
3.  It does not subvert the original meaning of the term or minimize it.
4.  There is no culture of acceptability around murder - it's one of the universally condemned features of human morality (one of the reasons that justified homicide is not called justified murder, in point of fact).
5.  Unlike 'rape,' 'that's so gay,' 'that's retarded,' etc, murder carries no baggage regarding gender, orientation, ability, or race.  It's a universal affliction.

1. So is rape. Comparions and meaning make sense.
2. Sez you.
3. Neither does rape.
4. And rape is acceptalbe? Since when?
5. So is rape. It's not exclusive for women, yet women exclusively identify with it...And that's really not my problem.

The comparison and meaning does not typically make sense - the majority of the time it's used in this context is as a synonym for "defeated" or "victimized."  The word rape holds neither of those denotative meanings.  "Murdered" does not carry additional connotative meaning in the phrasing you used beyond that which it would carry when I say "John Kennedy was murdered."  Meaning is the same.

As for subversion of the term, using rape in the context under discussion very much does subvert or belittle it's meaning.  It compares a loss at an entertainment activity to a crime which disproportionately affects one part of the populace and is based on power dynamics.  Here's food for though - isn't it interesting that people are using a word that describes a crime of power imbalance in a manner that reduces the power of the word itself?

As Batts pointed out, there are a large number of people who are unconcerned with or condone rape.  This ranges from college campuses to military armies.  Rape is a power weapon, and it is absolutely considered acceptable by some people.  Rape is not a universal crime like murder - rape is a crime of power dynamics, perpetrated in order to have power over and subjugate another person.  It is not exclusively women who are affected by the term, though they are definitely disproportionately represented.  A lot of that has to do with inherent power imbalances between males and females, and the history of rape - the "she asked for it" phenomenon that still exists in a lot of countries today.  The fact that you consider this not to be your problem just goes to show how little you really understand the issue and how immature about it you're being.

Having several good friends who have been seriously sexually-assaulted, I find your lack of compassion or willingness to consider any viewpoint other than your own selfish desire to say whatever you please with no regard for other people contemptuous.  You have the right to say whatever you please as far as I'm concerned, but it says more about your own character than anything else.  This, if anything, is what I would remind our younger forumites about - remember when you speak that you really don't know who your audience is.

EDIT:  Sorry Batts =)