Social DGames Social | V/LA |

[Gova]

That's why I'm gonna draw up a "Sex Contract", a legally binding contract that consenting young ladies would sign in advance of receiving any sweet loving from my loin, agreeing that they are consenting to having my manhood in and or around them.

This won't work; they'll just say you forced them to sign the contract.

 

[#HBC | Amidamaru]

after signing that contract, have a contract that states that they accept that the last one was not them being forced to sign. With two co-signers. You know. I forgot the term.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I can't even begin to unpack this (but I guess I'll try anyway).

No one is accusing all men of being rapists, and the fact that this is where the conversation always seems to go is why it's so hard to fix the problem. The issue is that men **** and get away with it, but for some reason people are often more worried about the potential to be falsely accused of **** (which seriously makes up a fraction of a fraction of cases; it is infinitesimally small) than the victims of ****. It is a grotesque inversion of priorities.

xonar beat me to this, but no, men AND women (and everything in between) ****, but in different percentages and different contexts.

But, acting otherwise perpetuates the gender norms that are significantly responsible for ****. It's all about creating scenarios where somebody feels they are owed sex or the other party is supposed to want to have sex, and the norms of male sexuality that society teaches us is exactly what creates this.

 

[Shun Goku Satsu Rake]

after signing that contract, have a contract that states that they accept that the last one was not them being forced to sign. With two co-signers. You know. I forgot the term.

Indemnifying yourself

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Nobody is going to run to your side and internet-crusader it up in this scenario because we know Ramses is being a ****head, and it is thus unnecessary.

And even if we did, it would simply be feeding the reaction that he seeks even further.

 

[#HBC | Amidamaru]

Circus, you reeeeeeally need to stop getting baited.

I can see the wrinkles forming from here.

Yeah Circus. Let's toast walrus.

 

[Circus]

Why are you mad at ME? Calm down dude.

I'm not mad at you. I just told you to read that post, because it seemed like you hadn't (I doubt Ryker really did either).

I don't care about how you want to define trolling.

It's not how I define trolling. It's not even really about the definition of trolling. It's about people thinking they have permission to act however they want and never get called on it.

Ramses said what he did to get a reaction (regardless of if you want to call it trolling or not), and you are giving him exactly the inflamed reaction he seeks.

I actually never responded to him at all. I responded to Joey, because he jumped to a silly (but all too commonly seen) conclusion regarding this topic. I merely corrected him, and expressed that constantly coming up against non-arguments on this topic is exhausting.

You KNOW you would be better off ignoring him, so you should not be surprised when Ryker and I are telling you to ignore him.

No, WE would ALL be better off if his brand of "trolling" wasn't tolerated around here. Anybody can say they're kidding about things like this. Maybe Xonar IS kidding; that's NOT THE POINT.

Nobody is going to run to your side and internet-crusader it up in this scenario because we know Ramses is being a ****head, and it is thus unnecessary.

When did it ever seem like that this was at all about anybody "running to my side?" This is absurd. It's like you're in an echo chamber and I can't reach you.

I don't care about anyone visibly siding with me. Believe it or not, I don't come to these boards to play opinion police. I just want to not see **** that's ridiculously offensive or ignorant, and so I feel compelled to speak up when it pops up. I did not instigate this. It doesn't make any sense that I'm always the one on trial in these conversations.

 

[Dooms]

I can't even begin to unpack this (but I guess I'll try anyway).

No one is accusing all men of being rapists, and the fact that this is where the conversation always seems to go is why it's so hard to fix the problem. The issue is that men **** and get away with it, but for some reason people are often more worried about the potential to be falsely accused of **** (which seriously makes up a fraction of a fraction of cases; it is infinitesimally small) than the victims of ****. It is a grotesque inversion of priorities.

If you're literally saying "no one", I'd say you're wrong. I agree with Xonar that there are people out there that do believe all men are the problem with ****. They're not, like at all. Nothing that men as a whole do lines up with a **** mentality.

**** of all things is not a one way road when it comes to sex. I don't care about percentages or numbers. The reality is that both sexes get ***** by both the opposite and the same sex, and people of both sexes get away with it. It doesn't matter if you're male or female, it's a huge ****ing problem, and blaming it on a specific sex (which some people do) is wrong.

Females "asking for it"? People saying "Guys getting ***** is impossible because they're the stronger of the two sexes"? The fact that seeking justice in your **** story can get you ridiculed because other people believe the person is falsely accused instead of realizing that the person seeking justice is a ****ING **** VICTIM? It's all a ****ING HUGE PROBLEM.

You're completely wrong in the fact that no one is accusing all men of being rapists (because there are idiotic people that are), and saying that men specifically **** and get away with it is a huge problem within itself.

 

[Circus]

xonar beat me to this, but no, men AND women (and everything in between) ****, but in different percentages and different contexts.

But, acting otherwise perpetuates the gender norms that are significantly responsible for ****. It's all about creating scenarios where somebody feels they are owed sex or the other party is supposed to want to have sex, and the norms of male sexuality that society teaches us is exactly what creates this.

The different percentages and different contexts are exactly why focusing on one over the other is important. Nowhere in my post did I say that only men ****, or that only women are *****. But it is a particular issue in regards to men ****** women, and derailing the issue by trying to talk about how EVERYONE ***** and we're ALL victims and it ALL sucks just makes it seem like there's an equivalency when there isn't. That doesn't solve the problem; it just clouds it.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

You should actually read my #45269, and the accompanying link.

Maybe you're so intelligent, like Ryker, that it won't sway your opinion (because that's how you measure intelligence, right? How unable you are to reconsider preconceived ideas?). But I posted it a for a reason.

You're trying to say quote somebody saying that people can't be trolling about misogynistic ideas. That's, honestly, not how the world works and /b/ is a perfect example of that. There's no boundaries for people who want to yank your chain, don't try to set up some imaginary ones that apply to a topic you're very sensitive about and then expect everyone else to follow them.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

The different percentages and different contexts are exactly why focusing on one over the other is important. Nowhere in my post did I say that only men ****, or that only women are *****. But it is a particular issue in regards to men ****** women, and derailing the issue by trying to talk about how EVERYONE ***** and we're ALL victims and it ALL sucks just makes it seem like there's an equivalency when there isn't. That doesn't solve the problem; it just clouds it.

you just tried to say "****'s bad but it's more important that women are getting *****" wtf

 

[#HBC | Joker]

That's why I'm gonna draw up a "Sex Contract", a legally binding contract that consenting young ladies would sign in advance of receiving any sweet loving from my loin, agreeing that they are consenting to having my manhood in and or around them.

Are there any other Chappelle Show skits you'd like to reenact?

 

[Ashemu]

It's not how I define trolling. It's not even really about the definition of trolling. It's about people thinking they have permission to act however they want and never get called on it.

[...]

No, WE would ALL be better off if his brand of "trolling" wasn't tolerated around here. Anybody can say they're kidding about things like this. Maybe Xonar IS kidding; that's NOT THE POINT.

this is an good post & soner shouldnt have been unbanned early tbh

i mean i do like gorf but letting people be assholes as long as they go "jk i was just TROLLING" is just permitting bad behavior. come on

 

[Raziek]

If you think it is offensive, please just report it.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I almost blew up because Circus insinuated that I ignored his prior post. Almost. You almost got me, Ramses.

Circus, I feel like you're looking at it through goggles where everything is out to get you when it is only Ramses, but I'm done here. I refuse to let Ramses get away with further turning this social thread into a place I don't want to be by pushing you around to snap at everyone else and I would urge everyone to flat out ignore Circus when he is being trolled.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Meanwhile, Ramses:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ZpA1FBSDM

(Dark Horse don't click)

 

[Ashemu]

lol i misread the end of taht url as BDSM

 

[Dooms]

The different percentages and different contexts are exactly why focusing on one over the other is important. Nowhere in my post did I say that only men ****, or that only women are *****. But it is a particular issue in regards to men ****** women, and derailing the issue by trying to talk about how EVERYONE ***** and we're ALL victims and it ALL sucks just makes it seem like there's an equivalency when there isn't. That doesn't solve the problem; it just clouds it.

No. What the ****, dude?

Like, I'm actually offended by this. I'm not going to go into details, but I'll just say that one of my close male friends has had an experience where he was *****, and you're over here literally saying that it's more important to focus on men ****** women because the percentages are higher? What in the **** does that mean for him, huh? He deserves just as much as everyone else in this fight for **** victims. Why in the flying **** should it be sex specific? Focusing on men ****** women is just giving male **** victims a big "**** you" for no ****ing reason. No. **** that. That's ****ing disgusting. It's a big ****ing problem, trying to break it down is just giving all of the **** victims not included the finger.

No. That's not okay. That's really not okay. ****, man. It's not okay.

Edit: Why in the **** would the percentage even matter here? **** VICTIMS ARE ****ING **** VICTIMS FOR CHRISTS SAKE. Their sex shouldn't matter. They all deserve equal help and treatment and not ridicule like what the **** dude.

 

[Circus]

you just tried to say "****'s bad but it's more important that women are getting *****" wtf

No. I didn't. I said **** is bad. And most cases of **** involve a man ****** a woman, and that is important for context. It's a general issue for everyone. It's an issue in life. But it is a particular issue for women. The same way any of use could technically fall to police brutality, but it is a particular issue for lower class people and people of color. That context is necessary for examing the issue properly. It's not just about how **** is bad. There are colors to it, involving the way women and men are viewed and treated different in society. Sex is something man get; sex is something women give. Sex is something men earn; sex is something women only succumb to. This can give us clues as to why men ****** women is such a specifically common problem compared to other types, and why it's mishandled so often (see: the artcile Acro linked to earlier in the thread), and potentially how to fix it.

 

[Circus]

Joey, I literally never said that. Read my above post; I think your sentiment is similar to Washed's.

 

[Circus]

Like, it is insane how far my position is being twisted here.

 

[adumbrodeus]

The different percentages and different contexts are exactly why focusing on one over the other is important. Nowhere in my post did I say that only men ****, or that only women are *****. But it is a particular issue in regards to men ****** women, and derailing the issue by trying to talk about how EVERYONE ***** and we're ALL victims and it ALL sucks just makes it seem like there's an equivalency when there isn't. That doesn't solve the problem; it just clouds it.

HELL DA F*** NO!

It's derailing when you treat two separate issues as exactly the same and then say there is no problem because it happens to everyone.

It's not derailing to bring up a related issue that happens to another group because they're related, especially given that the perception that women cannot **** men is part of the cultural framework that trains men to ****. It's not like not we're talking about a minute percentage of victims here, about 30% of sexual assault/**** victims are men (though they usually don't define it as such so the report rate is miniscule).

**** is a gendered issue, it's causes and contexts are different but ignoring the male end as a pressing matter not only hurts victims but actually is part of the reason why women get *****, that's not an equivalency that's an interrelated issue.

 

[Shun Goku Satsu Rake]

Joker getting the reference.
+1

 

[Gova]

I heard Ramses got ***** earlier in a game of League.

By Karma; haha man im funny

I guess this means no more offensive jokes.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

I honestly thought Xonar's post was funny. Like Ryker said, it was obvious hyperbole. I didn't think for a second that Xonar believed those things he was posting. In fact, I considered joining in on the joke. When adum asked what Xonar was parodying, I literally considered responding "Circus". The reason I didn't was because I figured exactly this was going to happen, and I'm super sad that it happened anyway.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

No. I didn't. I said **** is bad. And most cases of **** involve a man ****** a woman, and that is important for context. It's a general issue for everyone. It's an issue in life. But it is a particular issue for women. The same way any of use could technically fall to police brutality, but it is a particular issue for lower class people and people of color. That context is necessary for examing the issue properly. It's not just about how **** is bad. There are colors to it, involving the way women and men are viewed and treated different in society. Sex is something man get; sex is something women give. Sex is something men earn; sex is something women only succumb to. This can give us clues as to why men ****** women is such a specifically common problem compared to other types, and why it's mishandled so often (see: the artcile Acro linked to earlier in the thread), and potentially how to fix it.

But terms like "**** is bad for women" shouldn't exist. It should be "**** is bad", end sentence. Fighting against ****, male or female being the victim, should be fighting the issue on a whole, not fighting it for one gender or the other. Getting rid of **** should be the overall goal, not the overall goal for women or men. It shouldn't be "I need this because I'm a woman", it should be "I need this because it shouldn't happen". The issue shouldn't be gender-linked because it's an issue that affects both sides. **** is a problem, not a problem for women or a problem for men. Don't get too focused on the colors and miss the big picture of it all.

Also it's hard to understand your sentiment when you're saying things like this:

derailing the issue by trying to talk about how EVERYONE ***** and we're ALL victims and it ALL sucks just makes it seem like there's an equivalency when there isn't. That doesn't solve the problem; it just clouds it.

 

[#HBC | Amidamaru]

Also terms like 'tomboy' shouldn't exist either.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Let me illustrate the difference between derailing and discussing a relevant related issue, topic is how women are presented in media.

Person 1: Women are presented in a manner that's sexually submissive for the male gaze in media, reinforcing their gender role.

Derailing response:

Person 2: Well look at all those hunks in media, men are presented the exact same way!

Response that adds to the discussion:

Person 3: Men are presented in media as power fantasies in a way that's intended to appeal to men (eg. extremely overmuscled etc), however this also reinforces the male gender role of having to exercise agency and being worthless if that agency fails.


See, former dismisses it with a false equivalency hence derailing. Latter response adds to the discussion by pointing out how male depictions ALSO reinforce gender roles.

 

[Circus]

HELL DA F*** NO!

It's derailing when you treat two separate issues as exactly the same and then say there is no problem because it happens to everyone.

It's not derailing to bring up a related issue that happens to another group because they're related, especially given that the perception that women cannot **** men is part of the cultural framework that trains men to ****. It's not like not we're talking about a minute percentage of victims here, about 30% of sexual assault/**** victims are men (though they usually don't define it as such so the report rate is miniscule).

**** is a gendered issue, it's causes and contexts are different but ignoring the male end as a pressing matter not only hurts victims but actually is part of the reason why women get *****, that's not an equivalency that's an interrelated issue.

Okay, I don't really see how we're disagreeing here then. My point was simply that it is a gendered issue, and that the way society establishes and reenforces gendered traditions is a big part of the issue. It is my experience that when the issue starts to become "well everyone *****, and everyone gets *****, it's just one of those nasty things," which it seemed like we were rolling toward, the conversation just kind of evaporates and it's seen as this force that's out of our control—a defect of the human condition—rather than something fixable, and with clear origins. I value emphasizing this as a gendered issue for that reason, not because I think it's okay to erase other experiences.

 

[Ashemu]

HELL DA F*** NO!

It's derailing when you treat two separate issues as exactly the same and then say there is no problem because it happens to everyone.

It's not derailing to bring up a related issue that happens to another group because they're related, especially given that the perception that women cannot **** men is part of the cultural framework that trains men to ****. It's not like not we're talking about a minute percentage of victims here, about 30% of sexual assault/**** victims are men (though they usually don't define it as such so the report rate is miniscule).

**** is a gendered issue, it's causes and contexts are different but ignoring the male end as a pressing matter not only hurts victims but actually is part of the reason why women get *****, that's not an equivalency that's an interrelated issue.

^ even if this is true its basically irrelevant here because jumping into random conversations about women getting screwed over with "men also get *****" contributes nothing, unless the dude actually said men cant get ***** (which to my knowledge didnt happen here). it is effectively derailment.

 

[Gova]

Also terms like 'tomboy' shouldn't exist either.

But I like tomboys...

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Also terms like 'tomboy' shouldn't exist either.

Why? You're describing a girl who acts like a guy. If you don't like it in those terms, you're describing a girl who prefers more outdoorsy activities such as sports, yardwork, or handiwork.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

But I like tomboys...

me too gova, me too

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

^ even if this is true its basically irrelevant here because jumping into random conversations about women getting screwed over with "men also get *****" contributes nothing, unless the dude actually said men cant get ***** (which to my knowledge didnt happen here). it is effectively derailment.

why? Why is saying "men can get *****" not contributing? I can't speak for women because I'm not one. It's still an issue that affects men, why is it important for us to stay out of the conversation unless we're speaking for women?

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

oh i forgot to break my italics whoops

 

[#HBC | Amidamaru]

Why? You're describing a girl who acts like a guy. If you don't like it in those terms, you're describing a girl who prefers more outdoorsy activities such as sports, yardwork, or handiwork.

Because she isn't a girl that does things that boys do. She's a girl that ... prefers more outdoorsy activities such as sports, yardwork, handiwork, videogames, throwing ball, etc. Meaning, you are limiting her options as an individual. "Lol don't do that only boys do that, you don't have freedom"

I just think the word tomboy is dumb and fuels the cycle of feminism that women are trying to break from. That's what I get from reading Debonair. I mean hey she's just a girl that likes to play videogames. Why pin that as something 'boys do'. You know?

 

[Circus]

Let me illustrate the difference between derailing and discussing a relevant related issue, topic is how women are presented in media.

Person 1: Women are presented in a manner that's sexually submissive for the male gaze in media, reinforcing their gender role.

Derailing response:

Person 2: Well look at all those hunks in media, men are presented the exact same way!

Response that adds to the discussion:

Person 3: Men are presented in media as power fantasies in a way that's intended to appeal to men (eg. extremely overmuscled etc), however this also reinforces the male gender role of having to exercise agency and being worthless if that agency fails.


See, former dismisses it with a false equivalency hence derailing. Latter response adds to the discussion by pointing out how male depictions ALSO reinforce gender roles.

And I would say that Joey saying "not all men are rapists" was an example of derailing. That's what I was originally responding to. Then you responded to me about "not all ***** are man->woman", which is not something I had even asserted to the contrary. You can argue whether or not that's derailing; it's certainly at least confusing.

 

[#HBC | Amidamaru]

But I like tomboys...

Plot twist: I do too. But the term itself is dumb and how it is used.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Because she isn't a girl that does things that boys do. She's a girl that ... prefers more outdoorsy activities such as sports, yardwork, handiwork, videogames, throwing ball, etc. Meaning, you are limiting her options as an individual. "Lol don't do that only boys do that, you don't have freedom"

I just think the word tomboy is dumb and fuels the cycle of feminism that women are trying to break from. That's what I get from reading Debonair. I mean hey she's just a girl that likes to play videogames. Why pin that as something 'boys do'. You know?

who says she can't do it because boys do it? i'd like to think that all the work people have done to progress our understanding and fight against bias would insinuate there's nothing wrong with a girl being a tomboy

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Regardless of whether it is politically correct or not, people do it because it's convenient. Do you have a better word that isn't a mouthful?