BIG DICK NIGGA
this post is a lie about my bodily proportions
Major Arlene obsessed, 100% verified freakazoid. AKA bzzrak
Posts: 2,295
|
Post by BIG DICK NIGGA on Jul 2, 2020 20:17:41 GMT -5
Rape is bad but it's indeed sorta weird how it seems to be perceived as something worse than killing. It's much easier to make a killer joke than a rapist joke, and rape scenes tend to get much more negative reactions than killing scenes. Is it fucked up that we see things like this? I've been curious about it too, and the way they explained it to me was that you can't rationalise rape. Literally there's no scenario where raping someone is even remotely understandable. Murder can be out of revenge, or self defence. Rape can't, if you raped someone, it's because you're literally just a colossal piece of human trash and there's nothing more to it. Also the mention of murder can't "trigger" anyone since... yeah. Doesn't apply to rape.
|
|
BIG DICK NIGGA
this post is a lie about my bodily proportions
Major Arlene obsessed, 100% verified freakazoid. AKA bzzrak
Posts: 2,295
|
Post by BIG DICK NIGGA on Jul 2, 2020 20:21:53 GMT -5
Since the big man went through the trouble of splitting this off into it's own thread, I'd like to get a explanation. I feel I'm owed one. Nibba you're 40 years old and need to be explained why rape is fucking bad, you aren't owed shit Also double post because suck my balls
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 20:26:58 GMT -5
Nibba you're 40 years old and need to be explained why rape is fucking bad, you aren't owed shit Also double post because suck my balls I literally never said that rape wasn't bad. But I'm pretty sure you're trolling. Weak troll though, bro. I know you can do better than that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 20:51:06 GMT -5
You know how two men argue and then it ends in murder, one man gets killed and the other goes to prison. Is this conclusion worth winning an argument, even if you think yourself right?
Ever wondered how one gets in this situation, though. So I guess at least one party thinks they are right, and must convince the other they are wrong and won't accept anything less. The consequences are dire, now if only one could instead acted to prevent them rather than to win.
Now, trying to explain this with words is in itself futile.
And no, this is not off-topic cause it concerns the manner in which this topic is discussed. It is perhaps good all parties are communicating online, just in case.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by 40oz on Jul 2, 2020 22:56:18 GMT -5
Before I get started, let's be clear that the United States criminal justice system's understanding of the severity of rape is a far cry from what it really should be, especially considering the famous case of Brock Turner, a frat boy who raped a girl outside behind a dumpster while witnesses were present only received a sentence of 6 months in jail before being set free. Or Judge Brett Kavanaugh weeping while defending himself from sexual assault allegations during his confirmation hearing as Supreme Court Justice, and won. Or that numerous powerful figures, some actively in US government, were involved in a known child sex-trafficking ring. Or even that the face of President Andrew Jackson, a known owner of sex slaves, is printed on our $20 bill. So let's kindly discard what you might understand to be the legal definition of rape, which is unwanted penetration. Rape is a loaded term in the same way that when you say mac & cheese, I know you mean the butter, the salt, the extra seasonings, and the preparation associated with that recipe, and not just cooked macaroni noodles with a cold slice of cheese next to it. The reality (whether this is recognized in court or not) is that the act also includes the premeditation, the coercion, the manipulation, and in most cases, the physical battery and nonconsensual administering of hard drugs. It preys on feelings of love and security and turns it into a domineering act of desensitized, violent, sociopathy that is severely traumatizing and PTSD inducing on the victim. The PTSD symptoms are also amplified in the west by the sick fact that rape victims are often blamed in a manner in which victims of other violent crimes such as armed robbery or vehicular manslaughter are not. At least two friends of mine who revealed to me that they have been raped each have refused to press charges on their rapist. To some effect they feel guilty that they enabled their abuser to do that to them...? That's some serious mind-fuckery. Many victims also report being completely paralyzed by the act that they cannot even resist it. Also before we move on, I want to include here that while murdering someone is pretty severe, there are sometimes circumstances where euthanasia and abortions can sometimes be just and humane ways of taking a life. Murders are also rarely random acts of violence. They're more often a crime of passion, such as getting revenge for feeling betrayed by someone you once trusted. On the other hand, rape is more or less just a heinous self-serving act that cripples it's victim's emotions and leaves them to live with that traumatic experience. There really isn't any logistical motivation behind it. It's just cruel and far removed from human decency. With all that destructive power in the criminal act of rape known, I can surely get behind the general unlikelihood that a doom player playing this random mod who has been raped before and copes with that trauma on a day to day basis might play this one mod and have their symptoms triggered by reading the obituary message after being killed by an ethereal soul. Sure, that's a leap, fine. But we can't say it's guaranteed not to happen, and it's just socially irresponsible to do that to someone who's been through something like that. Keep in mind that there really is not a strong argument to be made that the floating severed skull object -- an ethereal soul, has any capacity to rape, or that it would even kill the player in the process of doing so (most rape victims survive.) The english language is pretty vast, and there's a multitude of action words that better represent the act of killing the player. It's just intellectually lazy, but that's still second to just being a shitty way to severely hurt a thin sliver of the population that has already been hurt enough.
|
|
dn
Body Count: 02
the motherfucking darknation
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by dn on Jul 2, 2020 23:38:59 GMT -5
I have been on the face of this earth for 37 years.
I have dealt (yes, dealt - the work involved takes years) with three people subjected to rape. actually
I am also drunk right now. Which is preventing me from ctually moderating right now, becasuse I don't want to wake up having banned Bob for no good reason.*
There is a diffrence between the word and the act. So far, I'm reading Bob would just go out raping and think that the act is somehow justified. Which means he has to fucking die.
Make your next comment in this thread incredibly good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 1:58:20 GMT -5
Tell me Bob, did you build with your legos or did you just snort the whole box because you are fucking terrible at putting pieces together.
We'll use a different delicate example, seeing as though rape is incomprehensible to you.
Terrorism.
- Terrorism is bad, terrorism problem in US land.
- 9/11 happens, many die, culture is changed.
- Make Doom wad.
- Obituary for cyberdemon is "player was beheaded by ISIS"
- People get mad, fuck me God knows why. Why do people get so mad over a lazy callous dropping of such a horrific thing?
Hmmmm don't fucking know the correlation, literally don't get why dropping the current worst thing I can reference so haphazardly, pointlessly and callously would offend people tbh.
|
|
|
Post by optimus on Jul 3, 2020 2:45:09 GMT -5
I only need to say I don't have such absolute view judging on some cases. I start becoming more agnostic because in many cases there are false rape allegations and this could be getting worse because of the hysteria. I don't know the Brock Turner case and I'd need to read more from other sources. But last time I heard Kavanaugh was found not guilty, the accusations couldn't be proven, I think one even admitted she made this up, and I am pretty sure this was a political game. It's so easy now to accuse someone and let "believe all women" play it's role. So, I don't buy that America is absolutely oblivious of rape and not taking it seriously. I prefer to become agnostic at least because I've heard so much from both sides.
|
|
|
Post by optimus on Jul 3, 2020 2:53:14 GMT -5
Rape is bad but it's indeed sorta weird how it seems to be perceived as something worse than killing. It's much easier to make a killer joke than a rapist joke, and rape scenes tend to get much more negative reactions than killing scenes. Is it fucked up that we see things like this? I've been curious about it too, and the way they explained it to me was that you can't rationalise rape. Literally there's no scenario where raping someone is even remotely understandable. Murder can be out of revenge, or self defence. Rape can't, if you raped someone, it's because you're literally just a colossal piece of human trash and there's nothing more to it. Also the mention of murder can't "trigger" anyone since... yeah. Doesn't apply to rape. If someone is a rapist, one approach is to leave it to psychologists to figure it why. To think with epithets "this guy is a monster" doesn't do something rather than fuming over an act (which I agree is horendous) but not solving the problem. I say that, because this extreme emotional approach (which I do understand) is what drives all these "Believe all women" when there are accusations of rape or sexual assualt or harrassment and we show those very frequently in all places now, in game industry, movies, etc. And people react demonizing the person accused, companies out of PR fire the person, without even knowing if he really did it. In some cases it's even proven it wasn't that, it was a bad date or consensual sex where the accuser later regret it, though the guy still lost his job and won't take it back even after the fact, meanwhile the mob thinks he got away with it. So, people in one side after these incidents, some of them proven false, but people still believe a rapist got away because they have this stuck in their mind. I just dislike this extreme emotionality (and I understand rape is awful, but the emotionality have been turned to eleven the last few years) and how it turns everyone being accused of, even some people were trying to date or did something lewd or even did nothing at all.
|
|
Lobo
Doomer
Posts: 556
|
Post by Lobo on Jul 3, 2020 4:17:59 GMT -5
Remember that rape/sexual assault definitions are constantly changing.
You have a few drinks with a girl, have consexual sex. That's sexual assault.
You had consexual sex with a girl 20 years ago. Now she suddenly decides she wasn't really into it. That's rape.
You're chatting up a girl and tell her you're a lawyer when you're really a plumber, have consexual sex, a week later she finds out what your job really is, that will soon be rape.
You ask a girl at the bar if she wants to have a drink sometime and she says no. That'll be sexual assault. (Really, I've read the draft laws for this)
And everyone loves to interchange both terms, so before you know it you're a rapist.
Think about these points really hard before you all jump on the emotional train. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 4:30:23 GMT -5
Yes, there are false accusations and condemnations; and yes there are also true horrible crimes that do not get punished, or worse yet, the claimant, the party who has suffered, is punished.
Justice fails. Not only with rape, but also with terrorism, murder, torture by state agency, etc. In all cases there can be people wrongfully convicted, receiving very large sentences for it; or people getting away with small sentences or not sentences at all for some really sick shit they have done.
Now, how does putting a word into doom's mod fit into this equation? How hard it is to simply not do it? And what's the point of doing it - will it actually solve the problem of injustice in the world? Demonstrating your point (whatever it is) on something does not fix injustice.
P.S. It's hard to admit - most of us can make little to no difference in the world. Hell, I can't even stop you arguing. And that's just a board with a small number of people.
|
|
Lobo
Doomer
Posts: 556
|
Post by Lobo on Jul 3, 2020 4:44:00 GMT -5
I think everyone agrees rape is a terrible horrible act. And by rape I mean what most people consider rape(see my previous post about the moving goalposts tendency).
Problem in this thread is that everything's getting all muddled up with censorship, political correctness, post-revisionism, social justice...and doom. Maybe they can't be discussed one without each other?
But yeah, probably better just to let this one go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 4:59:22 GMT -5
Some people recognise this world is imperfect and can't be fixed, so they want to be in afterlife with God. Some people accept the world is imperfect and learn to live in it, but don't believe there is a thing called afterlife.
I am of the latter kind variety. This issue here is not going to be resolved. Some things are simply beyond our limits - such as changing other person's opinion for example. Outwardly, they may change, but inwardly they can remain the same until (and if ever) life itself leads them to such change within.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 5:04:28 GMT -5
With all that destructive power in the criminal act of rape known, I can surely get behind the general unlikelihood that a doom player playing this random mod who has been raped before and copes with that trauma on a day to day basis might play this one mod and have their symptoms triggered by reading the obituary message after being killed by an ethereal soul. Sure, that's a leap, fine. But we can't say it's guaranteed not to happen, and it's just socially irresponsible to do that to someone who's been through something like that. Keep in mind that there really is not a strong argument to be made that the floating severed skull object -- an ethereal soul, has any capacity to rape, or that it would even kill the player in the process of doing so (most rape victims survive.) The english language is pretty vast, and there's a multitude of action words that better represent the act of killing the player. It's just intellectually lazy, but that's still second to just being a shitty way to severely hurt a thin sliver of the population that has already been hurt enough. First off thanks for actually responding intelligently, I appreciate it. To address your point, I think that mandating or even suggesting that someone alter their artwork or expression because it may trigger another person who has a choice on whether or not to experience it is something I'd never be in favor of. There will always be something, however well-intentioned, that can trigger a person if they've had a certain negative experience in their life. For instance, someone recently loses a relative to a car accident involving a blue Ford truck. You, as their co-worker, unwittingly show them a picture of your new blue Ford truck that you've just bought. It brings back a painful reminder of their dead relative. That's unfortunate, but do we address this possibility by telling people they shouldn't discuss blue Ford trucks? Of course you may say, "But rape is much a more common occurrence, Bob!" Yes it is. And so is killing, gun violence, torture, etc. Yet these are ok to be portrayed in video games and mods, even though they have the potential to evoke a similar negative reaction. Also, I think your last sentence again implies intent to harm, which I have yet to see demonstrated by the wad author. But to be fair, I don't know that person and as stated before have only read biased accounts from other forum threads. You know how two men argue and then it ends in murder, one man gets killed and the other goes to prison. Is this conclusion worth winning an argument, even if you think yourself right? Are you seriously suggesting someone is going to be murdered over a Doom forum argument? Or is this a veiled threat? I am also drunk right now. Which is preventing me from ctually moderating right now, becasuse I don't want to wake up having banned Bob for no good reason.* There is a diffrence between the word and the act. So far, I'm reading Bob would just go out raping and think that the act is somehow justified. Which means he has to fucking die.
You must be beyond shit-hammered if you actually read my posts in full, which I typed in plain English, and somehow came to the conclusion that I would "go out raping and think that the act is somehow justified". Please cite the specific passage of text where I insinuate that. Where is there even an inkling of justification or promotion of the act of rape in anything I said? I very plainly asked how the word "rape" was loaded, and why its use was "unwise and unwarranted". I asserted that certain people were attributing motives/fetishes to the wad author that weren't corroborated by evidence, and also asserted that some of these same people appear to believe that seeing the word "rape" in a death message would cause an impressionable teen to commit an actual rape, which I think is highly unlikely. I think you are seeing what you want to see, confirmation bias. Or just drunk, in which case, CHEERS! Make your next comment in this thread incredibly good.For the record I think you're a very funny and intelligent guy, I've enjoyed your posts immensely, and I'm glad that wielding the banhammer gets your dick hard - that's awesome. But I'm gonna comment however I see fit, and I'm not going to sanitize my posts to avoid termination. If that doesn't align with your idea of proper forum conduct, go ahead and nuke my account. I completely understand and won't take it personally in the slightest. You gotta do what you gotta do. If you think I'm bringing too much heat down on Doomer Boards, maybe that's the wisest decision. Like I said, no hard feelings whatsoever, my brother.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 5:26:18 GMT -5
Are you seriously suggesting someone is going to be murdered over a Doom forum argument? Or is this a veiled threat? No, that's a misunderstanding. I was suggesting an analogy so that I could persuade this thread to end. That is I put an example of situation where at least some of the arguing party must consider where it goes even if they are absolutely sure they are right, just so it does not end badly. I absolutely didn't intend that anyone deserves anything here. Quite the contrary, I believe no one here deserves to be harmed or punished despite of which beliefs they hold, or who is right. I wanted this to conclude in a peaceful way. At least I was certain that some time ago 40oz was close to wanting to ban you, at the first such time I interferred trying to suspend the argument. I forgot whether he actually can or not, it is hard to make sense who is an administrator here. Is it dn only? But it seemed to have effect back then, and you admit that 40oz replied to you intelligently, which may or may not have something to do with my timely intervention. Although I may think too highly of myself and probably should not think this way at all. So that was not a threat, but an analogy. Sorry it came off the wrong way. I just was trying to put example of a situation where the consequences need to be put above the argument. Also I should say dn's post can be read ambiguously, I've tried to read whether he was actually tried to defend you, implying that is the others who try to read your words in a different way from you have meant, and this alternative is likewise possible. But at least I admit I have no good way with words, either. Also remember that English is not my native language, that is, I may really understand things in incorrect way. And I absolutely do NOT want you banned. Were it otherwise, I would not even have interferred in the first place.
|
|
dn
Body Count: 02
the motherfucking darknation
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by dn on Jul 3, 2020 8:21:23 GMT -5
How exactly is the word "rape" a loaded word? Contrary to apparently popular belief, sitting with my finger over the ban button doesn't make my "dick hard": the fact that I'm having to think about it at all means I'm grinding my fucking teeth. I should not have to come home from my secret fucking corona bunker / toilet hooch distillery and have to deal with the excruciating levels of disingenuous pish I'm seeing in this thread. Fuck it, I'm out. Enjoy your thread. Hell, I'll pin it to the front fucking page so The Great Bob Rape Debate will be the first thing people see when they visit the site. Welcome to fucking Doomerboards.
|
|
Justince
Doomer
Professional Face-Puncher
Posts: 492
|
Post by Justince on Jul 3, 2020 10:29:07 GMT -5
You left out Joe Biden, his sexual assault allegations are 50x more credible than anything levied at Bret Kavanuagh but I'm sure that was an honest mistake.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by 40oz on Jul 3, 2020 17:57:24 GMT -5
There will always be something, however well-intentioned, that can trigger a person if they've had a certain negative experience in their life. For instance, someone recently loses a relative to a car accident involving a blue Ford truck. You, as their co-worker, unwittingly show them a picture of your new blue Ford truck that you've just bought. It brings back a painful reminder of their dead relative. That's unfortunate, but do we address this possibility by telling people they shouldn't discuss blue Ford trucks? Of course you may say, "But rape is much a more common occurrence, Bob!" Yes it is. And so is killing, gun violence, torture, etc. Yet these are ok to be portrayed in video games and mods, even though they have the potential to evoke a similar negative reaction. I dont think youre making the point you think youre making. First, youre example drastically minimizes the actual crisis of unaccountability of sexual assailants. It's an extremely volatile and acute level of emotional damage that comes from once having an enjoyabe mutual bond and trust in a friend or colleague who, to satisfy their urges, locks the door behind you, manhandles you, and forces himself inside you, using you as his sex object to completion and tosses you aside. This is one of many examples of a variety of unique rape situations (some far worse) and I guarantee there isnt a single parallel in terms of psychological torture associated with vehicular manslaughter in which the criminal escaped from the charges he way rapists often do. But most importantly, suppose your example is true? What benefit does it serve you or anyone to sooner debate with them the logical fallacy and slippery slope associated with showing people potentially triggering images before first acknowledging their pain? Youre going to act like you can't comprehend their feelings and continue talking about your new purchase and showing them more pictures when theyve made it clear to you what it does to them? Assuming it was just some flyaway example you havent thought all the way through -- it still represents a massive emotional distance from yourself and the problem. If we can assume you have thought it all the way through, this is most likely why dn is making the case that maybe you are the type of dude who doesnt see the big deal about rape. I asserted that certain people were attributing motives/fetishes to the wad author that weren't corroborated by evidence, and also asserted that some of these same people appear to believe that seeing the word "rape" in a death message would cause an impressionable teen to commit an actual rape, which I think is highly unlikely. I'll check the thread again but I dont remember reading anyone making the claim that seeing the word rape in the mod would make the suggestion to an impressionable person to go and do it. Im also fairly confident youre misreading something because that would definitely be stupid if true. No one of sane mind with a sexual apetite considers rape a viable alternative to actual consensual sex. Much less needs the approval of a video game to make that leap.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by 40oz on Jul 3, 2020 18:00:20 GMT -5
You left out Joe Biden, his sexual assault allegations are 50x more credible than anything levied at Bret Kavanuagh but I'm sure that was an honest mistake. Yes Joe Biden is indeed a sexual predator.
|
|
40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by 40oz on Jul 3, 2020 18:09:24 GMT -5
Remember that rape/sexual assault definitions are constantly changing. You have a few drinks with a girl, have consexual sex. That's sexual assault. You had consexual sex with a girl 20 years ago. Now she suddenly decides she wasn't really into it. That's rape. You're chatting up a girl and tell her you're a lawyer when you're really a plumber, have consexual sex, a week later she finds out what your job really is, that will soon be rape. You ask a girl at the bar if she wants to have a drink sometime and she says no. That'll be sexual assault. (Really, I've read the draft laws for this) Also remember were not talking about laws. This isnt a court case. We know Ethereal souls are video game entities. The issue is about using the word, especially when it doesnt serve a practical purpose or contribute to the entertainment with its usage in the fictional universe of the game, and also without pleading ignorance to the foul and destructive nature of the act in reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 18:55:27 GMT -5
40oz, I redownloaded Ethereal Soul from realm667 and the obituary message with the word "rape" is still there. Now, you may consider this fact "off-topic", but it is unclear to me at this moment. Is it only one person's opinion that this thread is concerned with?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 19:55:02 GMT -5
Fuck. I got it. We are discussing whether the "concept" of "rape" can be described as "loaded". And then there is an implication is that if someone didn't state that "rape as a concept" is one of an instances of "loaded concept", they must want to commit the act that is described by the concept itself.
Because by "concept" you mean an idea of action in the real world. And by "loaded concept" you mean an action that is not permissible to undertake.
Now the question is whether another person meant the abstractions "concept" and "loaded concept" this way.
Because the argument was not at all formalized.
EDIT: accidently wrote the "loaded concept" is permissible to undertake. I meant NOT permissible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2020 22:08:17 GMT -5
Since many may have read the previous post, I will have to do a new one, even though it is third in a row. I originally wrote "word" and not "concept". Turns out I was right the first time and not when I replaced it. So there is another layer of abstraction involved. Let's see: 1. the original claim is This is what starts the thread. 2. We split this into: terms A1 = "rape as a word" A2 = "loaded word" A3 = "rape as a real-life act" A4 = "act that is never acceptable" Statements (most can be either true or false independently of each other): L1 = "A1 is an instance of A2" (or "rape as a word is a loaded word") L2 = "A3 is an instance of A4" (or "the act of rape is never acceptable") L3 = "person X1 considers L1 to be false" (or "person X1 does not consider rape a loaded word") L4 = "person X1 considers L2 to be false" (or "person X1 does not consider the act of rape a <never acceptable act>") L5 = "person X1 is going to commit A3" (or "person X1 is going to commit an act of rape") L6 = "if L3 is true, L4 follows" L7 = "if L4 is true, L5 follows" Note here X1 is a parameter and does not, as of yet, mean specific person. And the true/false values are not assigned yet. 3. If both L3 and L6 were true, then L4 is true. But unless L7 is true L5 is not necessary true when L4 is true. I consider L6 to be FALSE, so this is where it stops. L4 thus does not follow from L3 and for L7 to become relevant we must ascertain whether L4 is true. Note at this stage X1 remains a parameter. 4. From the statement I literally never said that rape wasn't bad. @vordakk statement can NOT be interpreted as L4 = true for a parameter X1 = @vordakk . That means, we must accept the possibility of L4 = false for this parameter, which I consider is how the things are, and given my stance that L6 = false. The L7 thus remain irrelevant, and we shouldn't think L5 is true for this parameter as well. With that out of the way, this topic would concern either L1 or L3, in the latter case a parameter takes a specific value. The thing is - which statement you are actually debating and which statements you hold as true? I don't like the fact that variable is taken to be a specific person, either. And there was at least one more statement that got lost in transition. That is whether it was ok to include an instance of A1 in a specific way in a mod, which was originally the discussion, but this debate was lost when the topic was split and posts moved. It is probably not even a single thing we lost, though. Also another thing would be whether a specific author is guilty of "including an instance of A1 in specific way in specific mod", also whether it was correct to address this in specific way another specific person is done, etc. There was a whole tower of statements. And I'm pretty sure different people wanted to debate very different layers of this tower. Yet another would be "someone might include an instance of A1 in the future", "what we do about someone including an instance of A1" (when that happens) etc. etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2020 4:14:10 GMT -5
...it still represents a massive emotional distance from yourself and the problem. If we can assume you have thought it all the way through, this is most likely why dn is making the case that maybe you are the type of dude who doesnt see the big deal about rape. I think that we are focusing on two different aspects of the topic, and because of that we are talking past each other, while at the same time wondering why the other person isn't picking up on what we're saying. This is actually pretty common when two people who perceive the world differently debate a topic. I think if we navigate past the barriers that currently separate us, I honestly think we'd agree more than we'd disagree. You tend to focus more on emotions, and I more on logic and facts. Neither approach is intrinsically better or worse. But just because I lean towards a more cold, logical approach does not mean that I have a "massive emotional distance" between myself and the issue of rape, nor does it mean that I can't empathize with someone who has been affected. That's the wrong assumption to make, just as it would be wrong for me to assume that because you lean towards empathy and emotion that you are somehow incapable of rational discourse. If you really think that you have a conclusive psychoanalysis based on the contents of this thread, and have surmised that I "don't see the big deal about rape", then you clearly have a lot to learn about me. As convenient as it is to want to fit people into square boxes with labels, it rarely works that way in the real world. And I know you're smart enough to know that. You are more in tune with the emotional side of the issue - hence your focus on how traumatic rape is and the lasting negative effects on the psyche. I'm more focused on the principle of denying someone their freedom to express themselves simply because there's a tiny chance that a person with every option to avoid a mod might stumble upon it and be triggered. Might I suggest a compromise? What if the wad author was not discouraged from including potentially offensive material in his creation, but was required to place some sort of disclaimer or warning tag on the wad, or perhaps annotate the wad in some way so that upon upload to /idgames it would be filed in a certain section of the archives containing potentially offensive material? Wad authors would also need to state this disclaimer up front when providing a link to such a wad on the forum itself, in cases where playtesting is required. This would allow for complete freedom of expression, while effectively eliminating the possibility that an unwary player might download and play a wad that could offend or trigger them. As I see it, this would satisfy both sides. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by optimus on Jul 4, 2020 4:39:15 GMT -5
We know Ethereal souls are video game entities. The issue is about using the word, especially when it doesnt serve a practical purpose or contribute to the entertainment with its usage in the fictional universe of the game, and also without pleading ignorance to the foul and destructive nature of the act in reality. Why is it when rape is mentioned, the justification for removing it is "But this element doesn't contribute to the universe of the game, or it doesn't make sense with the rest of the story, or it's put there for shock value"? As an example I remember one thing. That episode on Game of Thrones where Sansa Stark was raped but that psycho. I already hated that psycho in the show because of how he kept and tortured Theon. And the whole show is dark with a lot of horrible things happen to people. So, one knows what the show is all about and what to expect. But when there was a rape implied in a scene? People lost their shit! And here is the point. How did they justified it? "That scene was put there just for shock value, it's irrelevant to the plot, it didn't need to exist to make sense with the rest of story". It was irrelevant to the story they said, "put there for shock value or to glorify rape". A show that is about extreme violence and many explicit sexual scenes, because that will attract viewers, so many seasons where this played like this and nobody complained. But one implied rape scene and people lose their minds. I don't get it. If I was to go like this, Doom has unnecessary violence. Hell,.this Doom 2016, why do they have to show me mutilating bodies for 40 hours? Why don't they just let me shoot without any explicit violence? Hell,. I like Doom because of the player moving fast and I like to explore spaces. I like the 3d environments and the architecture and the atmosphere. I could claim that's all I want to do, I can also shoot monsters and there will be indication that I hit something but not with explicit violence. Maybe Noah's Ark And really, this was a word in the obituaries. The obituaries are written in ways to be edgy or different. "Player was killed by monster". Oh,. what else could we put to replace "kill"? And words flow. Some of them are funny. Some of them fit, some of them don't. "Rape" fit and maybe the authors thought was edgy and nobody would bat an eye in the past, but no we live in the current year, ain't it?
|
|