Xyzz
Smash Champion
I think there is some Sheik player who has those awesome (and completely unnecessary) tipped up smash kills all the time... Named after Kirby or sth.
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Gay, ****, Homo and similar words...
- Thread starter Kully
- Start date
KrIsP!
Smash Champion
Kirby....2king? I know there was something about a 2 or a k, maybe 2 ks even...
N1c2k3
Smash Lord
1st and only post:
Context most definitely does define a word. Even so, we should be very careful about what we say around others.
The word **** refers to an extremely sinful act and something egregiously painful for those who have suffered it. I don't think it should it should be used loosely, even in context, around those you don't know, for their sake.
The slippery slope argument is completely valid. If we're discussing words that are allowed/not allowed to be used, you're basically beginning the censorship free speech. If I as heterosexual start getting offended by the terms "straight" or "hetero", should I expect you to stop using them? I hope you would call it out for the ridiculousness it is.
More importantly, though, is looking at the root of the issue. A black guy once called me an "****in cracker"or a something similar at summer camp in an obviously derogatory way. Should I be angry at the word he used, or rather concerned why he said it? What would be in his heart that would cause him to want to put down another person like that? If my concern is for others' well beings, I'm not going to be as concerned with what was said, but moreso the cause of it.
Not saying words don't hurt. They're obviously an extremely powerful tool, whether used for good or evil, and some words should never be used, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't permit them. Irregardless, our response to an evil word shouldn't be to hark for the word to be banned, but to find the root cause of why it's used and fix that instead.
Context most definitely does define a word. Even so, we should be very careful about what we say around others.
The word **** refers to an extremely sinful act and something egregiously painful for those who have suffered it. I don't think it should it should be used loosely, even in context, around those you don't know, for their sake.
The slippery slope argument is completely valid. If we're discussing words that are allowed/not allowed to be used, you're basically beginning the censorship free speech. If I as heterosexual start getting offended by the terms "straight" or "hetero", should I expect you to stop using them? I hope you would call it out for the ridiculousness it is.
More importantly, though, is looking at the root of the issue. A black guy once called me an "****in cracker"or a something similar at summer camp in an obviously derogatory way. Should I be angry at the word he used, or rather concerned why he said it? What would be in his heart that would cause him to want to put down another person like that? If my concern is for others' well beings, I'm not going to be as concerned with what was said, but moreso the cause of it.
Not saying words don't hurt. They're obviously an extremely powerful tool, whether used for good or evil, and some words should never be used, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't permit them. Irregardless, our response to an evil word shouldn't be to hark for the word to be banned, but to find the root cause of why it's used and fix that instead.
First off, as has been stated it's not about someone censoring someone else. It's about your personal decision on whether or not to use these words, and what it says about your character. If you cling so ardently to your right to use a couple words that have the power to hurt, when you lose nothing from not saying them, that says they do, in fact, mean something to you, and given their express purpose, what they mean to you says you like having the power to hurt people, which is really disconcerting.
And it's pretty clear you did not read ZeldaFreak's post about privilege. For a straight person or a white person to be offended by slurs about them in the same way as a homosexual or black person could be offended by slurs about them would require that the daily life of a straight or white person not be validated every waking moment. You have the privilege not to be offended when someone calls you a cracker, because you can walk away from it, and have society tell you it really doesn't matter because being white is a good thing. If you call a black person a ******, or gay person a ******, they don't have that kind of fallback.
And it's pretty clear you did not read ZeldaFreak's post about privilege. For a straight person or a white person to be offended by slurs about them in the same way as a homosexual or black person could be offended by slurs about them would require that the daily life of a straight or white person not be validated every waking moment. You have the privilege not to be offended when someone calls you a cracker, because you can walk away from it, and have society tell you it really doesn't matter because being white is a good thing. If you call a black person a ******, or gay person a ******, they don't have that kind of fallback.
MrHazuki
Smash Ace
I strongly disagree about this. Discrimination goes all ways. I am not questioning which demographics it affects the most, but to neglect all discrimination against straight white males is still pretty dumb. Black gay women can also be capable of withstanding all that.
Massive
Smash Champion
I think we shouldn't censor any text at all on smashboards.
If someone offends you, you can ignore it, hide it, or even report them. If they do it repeatedly, they can be banned.
We have mods for a reason.
Also, telling people their opinion is invalid because they're not gay is about as stupid as using gay as pejorative. Persecution complex much?
If someone offends you, you can ignore it, hide it, or even report them. If they do it repeatedly, they can be banned.
We have mods for a reason.
Also, telling people their opinion is invalid because they're not gay is about as stupid as using gay as pejorative. Persecution complex much?
ZeldaFreak0309
Smash Journeyman
Did you even read my post? I'm not saying his opinion is invalid because he's not gay. I'm saying his opinion is bad because it's being made without having understood certain experiences that are relevant to the thing he's having an opinion about. OF COURSE straight people can empathize with gay people. Those people are the ones that understand why casually using 'gay' to mean 'lame' is harmful. I don't think Wretched is a bad guy at heart, he just lacks understanding about why the casual use of homophobic slurs is harmful--something he doesn't understand because he's straight and nobody has bothered to point this out to him before.
Kaeon
Smash Cadet
Just to give my perspective on words and their meanings, I will start by saying I am a man of a brown complexion. When I hear a person of a more fair skin tone say the version of "dark skinned individual" with a hard r, even if I know they didn't mean it and am not black myself, I still feel uneasy, for no forseeable reason. People don't need a reason to be hurt, especially if they feel strongly about something.
Massive
Smash Champion
Yes, and every other post in this thread. Probably several times, I jump around a lot.
I do actually agree with you in many ways on this, and I really hate to keep playing the devil's advocate here, but you're still saying that Wretched's opinion is "bad" because he doesn't agree with you.
You have provided no real evidence to prove him wrong other than anecdotes from what is presumably your life experiences. This means that if you accept him as an equal human being, the opinion you have provided holds basically the same weight as his to an observer. More people having the same opinion as you doesn't make their opinion(s) more right on either side. This is why people vote on things. The reason this turns into a big deal is that it is a feelings vs. feelings argument which, by virtue of lacking any real data on either side (IMO), rapidly devolves into mudslinging.
I don't envision you'll find anybody against treating others with respect- especially in this community; however, it needs to be said that people are not going to change sides because they theoretically hurt someone's feelings on the internet. Testimonials and anecdotes only strengthen already existing opinions, hard evidence (data) is the real thing that has the capacity change minds.
Also, I feel like my post may have gone full meta, sorry guys.
MookieRah
Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
No, it's not valid. You assume that once someone is opposed to a select few set of words that somehow everything is under assault. This is why it's a logical fallacy. You are completely ignoring the actual argument and accusing it to be far more extreme than what it is.
While cracker is a racial slur, it is a slur to the majority group. It doesn't have the history of physical oppression and violence behind it, and it'ssomething that is fairly easily shrugged off.
I don't think it should be neglected either, but if you are going to argue on something based on impact then cracker is nowhere near the level ofother slurs. Again, the straight white male is the most privileged group, and the one that western society caters to.
---- MASSIVE EDIT ----
No we are saying that his argument is not logical. The crux of his argument is that words are just tones in the air, and that context is the only thing that matters. This is wrong on many fronts. First, words are not just sounds, they are audio symbols of ideas with the purpose of communication. There is plenty of research on language in cognitive science that shows that when a person hears a word, their brain lights up much more than if they heard a random sound.
Secondly, despite the context and or tone/inflection, words still retain their meanings. One cannot detach the core definition of a word. If you use the word "gay" to describe something as negative or unappealing, you are marginalizing homosexuals. It doesn't matter whether or not you actually feel that you are or not, you are still associating it negatively. Also, no amount of using the word "gay" in other ways will alter it's core definition for a very long time. Generations will have to go by before it could be stripped of it's negative connotations to homosexuals.
The evidence for the assertion of straight white male privilege within western society is obvious if you actually think about it. For example, how many non-white or non-straight male main characters are there in movies, tv shows, and games? How many non-white action stars in lead roles that aren't Will Smith? How many movies, games, and tv shows pass the bechdel test?
The answer to all those questions are very very very few. All of our stories in popular culture are primarily focused on straight white males. If that is not clear indication that things are biased as hell towards that demographic, I don't know what is, and honestly that is just the tip of the iceberg.
ZeldaFreak0309
Smash Journeyman
First off, I'm glad I can have a civil discussion about this with you, 'full meta' and all =P
So, you're right. I've neglected to provide any sort of empirical data to back up my arguments, which I thought would be self-explanatory enough (see MookieRah's post above) that they don't require references. But I guess I'm wrong. So here's some evidence that I'm not just making **** up:
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/statistics/1mdd_adult.shtml - Women are 70% more likely to experience depression in their lifetime than men
http://www.theroot.com/views/do-whites-have-mental-health-advantage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology (if you're going to disparage Wikipedia as a source I can go actually look up the scholarly articles that are referenced...but come on)
A particularly good illustration of how simply feeling accepted by your community can make a difference: http://www.npr.org/2013/05/20/184829036/bans-of-same-sex-marriage-can-take-a-psychological-toll
MikeHaggarTHAKJB
Smash Master
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110725202240.htm
If that had to do with sexism in society, you'd see a large difference between countries. You don't.
It's most likely primarily biological causes. Postpartum depression(or psychosis or mania) is another great reference.
Being part of a minority group myself: the mentally ill (in the form of recurring depression), I have some things to say about all this.
First of all this NOTHING to do with how i act here or at tournies, the rumors regarding this that has been spread around by leffen (and the ppl who somehow beleive still beleive that he is capable of being genuine, despite claiming that i refused to speak to him at beast when i in fact did and asked for forgiviness myself, and loads of other bs AFTER his official excuse) is 99% false, and if you think that mental illness in itself has anything to do with personality youre so misinformed that you should kill yourself. If you beleive that for example psychotic people are any more dangerous then your average person to anyone but themselves I would also recommend that you commit suicide.
When my friends joke about mental illness without malicious intent I don't mind, I find it funny myself, and I do it myself constantly. However if it intentionally at my expense and/or to reinforce false stereotypes (something which I do not blame on freedom of speech, but lack of knowledge), i have no tolerance for it. To me it is very easy to tell what the intent is, based on tone, choice of words, body language/eye contact, etc etc.
I wouldn't mind if people said "OMG this fox is going psychotic!" or "X players' marth is moving so slow it's gotta have psychomotor *********** [from clinical depression]".
In fact, I'm going to start saying that people with weird/illogical playstyles have psychotic playstyles, and include it in my next video. And people who are slow are clinically depressed.
Faab's falco is psychotically depressed.
omfg thats offensive some people are actually asexual
This is so true. I shouldn't even have to tell so much about myself for people to listen (but it's also because I might aswell due to the made up bs floating around, and the only reason to shut up about it is false stereotypes)
FYI everyone, I've had old ladies grab my ass and even slide their hands by my ****.
Sucks that I'm a man in that situation, had I been a woman I would've been able to slap the **** out of them.
Totally not discrimination.
Vashimus
Smash Master
I generally don't speak like that, but once in a while something slips out. My biggest problem is I use the word "gay" as a verb for pulling off a cheap shot or something stupid. (eg. He gayed me up. Hey, stop gaying it up! etc) I know it sounds silly, but I've just gotten so used to saying that.
Really, I just think the word "gay" is going through the same phase the word "lame" did. The textbook definition of lame is to be crippled or physically disabled, not "uncool" or stupid. Yet the latter is still the most common definition used. So if you're saying "He's playing super lame", isn't that offensive to cripples? Not really trying to argue, just food for thought.
As far as **** is concerned, I always tend to find more creative, over-the-top words to describe a beatdown, since they're much more satisfying to say. Wrecked, creamed, bodied, destroyed, demolished, dominated, decimated, devastated, annihilated, slaughtered, massacred, obliterated, exterminated -- the English language is filled with colorful words, all which have much more power and "oomph" to them than ****. Hell, you can even do what I do and make one up. Like destrolish.
Or what Strong Bad said.
I also find it ironic when people here pull the "freedom of speech" card out, yet are posting on a forum where they're expected to follow a Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You can speak what you want, but you must also accept the consequences of what you say. It's not always about you.
Really, I just think the word "gay" is going through the same phase the word "lame" did. The textbook definition of lame is to be crippled or physically disabled, not "uncool" or stupid. Yet the latter is still the most common definition used. So if you're saying "He's playing super lame", isn't that offensive to cripples? Not really trying to argue, just food for thought.
As far as **** is concerned, I always tend to find more creative, over-the-top words to describe a beatdown, since they're much more satisfying to say. Wrecked, creamed, bodied, destroyed, demolished, dominated, decimated, devastated, annihilated, slaughtered, massacred, obliterated, exterminated -- the English language is filled with colorful words, all which have much more power and "oomph" to them than ****. Hell, you can even do what I do and make one up. Like destrolish.
Or what Strong Bad said.
I also find it ironic when people here pull the "freedom of speech" card out, yet are posting on a forum where they're expected to follow a Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You can speak what you want, but you must also accept the consequences of what you say. It's not always about you.
On an individual scale, you're not wrong. Prejudice goes many ways. The topic here is the greater societal system, though, which on the whole (at least in America) drastically favors white heterosexual men. And in that context, my point still stands, because if one individual discriminates against a white heterosexual man, he can take five steps in any direction and cease to encounter that discrimination, thus demonstrating its anomalous nature. A marginalized individual does not have this, because walking away five steps only shows them a society that validates straight white dudes.
MrHazuki
Smash Ace
As MookieRah said, the impact is different, but what happens is exactly the same thing. Slur is slur. There is no such thing as an uninsultable stereotype.
I said that, too.
I also said that following it up with "just deal with it," doesn't stand up to scrutiny because of the social and historical structures built up around those slurs, and the way society systematically marginalizes some people and validates others.
thespymachine
Smash Ace
I understand that people don't, for the most part, use these words to put-down people (outside the context of the game). I think the biggest problem I have with any sort of curse/derogatory words is that they become catch-alls. By that I mean the words end up representing various (and even dissimilar) expressions. It tends to be obnoxious because their use becomes unrelenting.
Clearly, this wouldn't be a big problem if 'gay' didn't become a term to homosexual people, and if '****' wasn't an actual problem. (But, then, would gay have been used in the first place?)
Honestly, I think the more our culture realizes how many of our members are gay (which I'm so happy some are open about it right here, btw), the more 'gay' won't be used in that way. It won't go away, just not as prominent.
Good OP.
Clearly, this wouldn't be a big problem if 'gay' didn't become a term to homosexual people, and if '****' wasn't an actual problem. (But, then, would gay have been used in the first place?)
Honestly, I think the more our culture realizes how many of our members are gay (which I'm so happy some are open about it right here, btw), the more 'gay' won't be used in that way. It won't go away, just not as prominent.
Good OP.
KrIsP!
Smash Champion
As long as I can say **** and **** so that I can say holy ****ig **** I'm good. The words describes here aren't part of my vocabulary in these contexts to be honest, tbh I know more gay people who use gay to mean dumb or lame than I do. Sometimes I'll say "***** face" as a term but I've yet to meet someone offended by it.
I'm the kind of person to avoid certain words if I know they'll offend someone, I've done well to censor myself in different ways around different people but if someone tries to chew me out because of how some hypothetical person may feel because of their experiences. I guess I just feel that no one should have to be censored, but that doesn't mean you can expect people to have different opinions if you based on what you say.
Although I am if the south parkian school if theory. The three letter f word should stop meaning gay. It didn't originally mean that, it was meant to be offending and it was used on them, it's now more often used for things other than gay and I'd rather work to change the perceived definition than kill the word entirely. It does seem to be the word that offends people the most though. Calling people *** because they're gay is dumb because being homosexual should be alright by now. Calling people a *** for laser camping over and over again should be alright cause its ****ing dumb. But I avid that word anyways so whatever
I'm the kind of person to avoid certain words if I know they'll offend someone, I've done well to censor myself in different ways around different people but if someone tries to chew me out because of how some hypothetical person may feel because of their experiences. I guess I just feel that no one should have to be censored, but that doesn't mean you can expect people to have different opinions if you based on what you say.
Although I am if the south parkian school if theory. The three letter f word should stop meaning gay. It didn't originally mean that, it was meant to be offending and it was used on them, it's now more often used for things other than gay and I'd rather work to change the perceived definition than kill the word entirely. It does seem to be the word that offends people the most though. Calling people *** because they're gay is dumb because being homosexual should be alright by now. Calling people a *** for laser camping over and over again should be alright cause its ****ing dumb. But I avid that word anyways so whatever
MikeHaggarTHAKJB
Smash Master
Linguistic history says hello.
In other words, you're wrong.
FirestormNeos
Smash Lord
Would you care to explain that sentence, or is this sentence too hostile for an answer.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2007
- Messages
- 19,484
- NNID
- Super_Sand_Lezbo
- 3DS FC
- 3179-6068-0031
- Switch FC
- SW-7639-0141-7804
Have discussed this matter with both homosexual friends, and even a **** victim, it's honestly upsetting even though the people themselves told me they use the words in the same context. Also had African-American friends discussing 'that' word, and they just shot back at me how I feel about being called my particular race's/orientation's equivalent of the word, to which we both replied we don't really mind as much as we should.
In short, ignorance is always prevalent no matter how much effort to abolish it there is. I think what the people I've discussed this with were trying to say (obviously some having a bit more justification than others. I don't think the **** victim in particular can be blamed at all for their stance on the matter, as opposed to the whole race example I briefly mentioned) is while the usage is subjective, it's up to both the context of the situation and whether the habitual "Defender of the Universe/**** is bad, m'kay?" or "It's just us/having fun" nature/perspective/mindset happens to to be there at the time. It's easy to say those of us used to using the terms would get it/try to justify it, yet at the same time most people acquiesce to whichever self-righteous nut is trying to preach that onlookers might see us in a bad way for doing it.
For a simpler example, my homosexual friends who I've discussed this matter with would probably call me a ***got for using my big words and fancy edumacation to make this post seem more interesting. Yet I'd jump on anyone seriously stupid enough to say any of this and mean it offensively.
In short, ignorance is always prevalent no matter how much effort to abolish it there is. I think what the people I've discussed this with were trying to say (obviously some having a bit more justification than others. I don't think the **** victim in particular can be blamed at all for their stance on the matter, as opposed to the whole race example I briefly mentioned) is while the usage is subjective, it's up to both the context of the situation and whether the habitual "Defender of the Universe/**** is bad, m'kay?" or "It's just us/having fun" nature/perspective/mindset happens to to be there at the time. It's easy to say those of us used to using the terms would get it/try to justify it, yet at the same time most people acquiesce to whichever self-righteous nut is trying to preach that onlookers might see us in a bad way for doing it.
For a simpler example, my homosexual friends who I've discussed this matter with would probably call me a ***got for using my big words and fancy edumacation to make this post seem more interesting. Yet I'd jump on anyone seriously stupid enough to say any of this and mean it offensively.
Zodiac
Smash Master
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 3,557
These threads pop up here every so often and it basically always goes the same way
Party 1: Somone might be gay or a **** victim stop saying it.
Party 2: people who use these words are immature and should learn to speak like adults.
Party 3: lol stop being a bunch of butt hurt homos and come **** some noobs you ******s.
Party 1: Somone might be gay or a **** victim stop saying it.
Party 2: people who use these words are immature and should learn to speak like adults.
Party 3: lol stop being a bunch of butt hurt homos and come **** some noobs you ******s.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 9,609
- 3DS FC
- 3136-6583-3704
That's blindly stupid. ****** and ****** are both offensive for the exact same reason.
You should actually study historical linguistics.
Taboo is one of the strongest forces for language change. In some cultures, it forces fundamental grammatical shifts.
MikeHaggarTHAKJB
Smash Master
it also happens that **** changes meaning when its used to address other things
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7C0vd-L5lg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7C0vd-L5lg
Jesus Christ. How the **** did feminist, social justice warriors, atheism + ******* get into the smash community? Take your horse**** back to reddit/tumblr. The only last bit of nonsense they have to spit is the racism = privilege + power . I couldn't be bothered to get into it but the 1 in 5 women are ***** is bull****, that includes someone touching your ass( I have been "*****" by that definition). Don't trust any statistics or articles they give you, they are always misleading.
MookieRah
Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
@Nicco
Hell, typefaces have baggage. If designers are steered away from certain typefaces because of how they were used will invoke or communicate in a way that doesn't mesh with their message then it should be painfully obvious that in order to communicate effectively you need to be careful of your word choice.
@MikeHagger
Language changes really fast and words acquire alternate meanings all the time, but their main definition doesn't change as quickly. When a word has a main definition of a racial slur, it will take many, many generations for it to lose that as a main definition because it has so much impact. My nazi example is a good example for this as well. Things will have to improve for both racial minorities and the LGBT communities for a very long time before those slurs would ever get to the point where they are not used as a pejorative.
@$haDy
So much to say about such a small post. For starters, myself and many of the people you refer as "getting into the smash community" were here before you. Also, tumblr/reddit is laughably not even close to be considered some kind of "social justice headquarters" that you make it out to be. Also the idea of racism = privilege + power makes a lot of sense, and would be the last thing I would try to argue from your stance.
As far as **** statistics go, you can find several objective sources for **** statistics that don't have feminist leanings. Hell, the **** statistics I quoted came from government reports or from the AMA. Hardly "feminist" sources for information. Also, someone touching your ass is not **** by any definition of the word. Groping somone's ass would be a form of sexual assault, which does not a **** make.
Yeah... no. Words mean what they mean. If they were as you described them we would be unable to communicate at all. When you say a word like "nazi" for example, you bring up a lot of connections to a lot of things, but just because everyone uses "nazi" as being uptight these days, we all know that it's main definition is tied to Hitler and the Holocaust. Words have baggage, and you can't just eliminate the baggage that they have.
Hell, typefaces have baggage. If designers are steered away from certain typefaces because of how they were used will invoke or communicate in a way that doesn't mesh with their message then it should be painfully obvious that in order to communicate effectively you need to be careful of your word choice.
@MikeHagger
Language changes really fast and words acquire alternate meanings all the time, but their main definition doesn't change as quickly. When a word has a main definition of a racial slur, it will take many, many generations for it to lose that as a main definition because it has so much impact. My nazi example is a good example for this as well. Things will have to improve for both racial minorities and the LGBT communities for a very long time before those slurs would ever get to the point where they are not used as a pejorative.
@$haDy
So much to say about such a small post. For starters, myself and many of the people you refer as "getting into the smash community" were here before you. Also, tumblr/reddit is laughably not even close to be considered some kind of "social justice headquarters" that you make it out to be. Also the idea of racism = privilege + power makes a lot of sense, and would be the last thing I would try to argue from your stance.
As far as **** statistics go, you can find several objective sources for **** statistics that don't have feminist leanings. Hell, the **** statistics I quoted came from government reports or from the AMA. Hardly "feminist" sources for information. Also, someone touching your ass is not **** by any definition of the word. Groping somone's ass would be a form of sexual assault, which does not a **** make.
D
Deleted member
Guest
I'm not so sure about that. **** is an act with a vague and nebulous definition just as much as other aggressive words are such as "assault" or "abuse". Having researched abuse extensively, it seems that many acts of a subjectively interpreted situation can be taken as **** or abuse depending upon subjective interpretation. That is a bad, bad place to be considering the weight of the accusation. As usual, America has no sense of moderation with its policies.
I'd like to present this site and its articles as interesting reading material:
http://www.falserape.net/
This is not so much a part of the discussion at hand, but rather an expansive tangent to this thread.
Signia
Smash Lord
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,157
Lol, you should've been at the H2 tourney that attracted last remnants of H2 players on the west coast last weekend. '08 all over again
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2008
- Messages
- 26,564
ur gonna go far in life
real far
Xyzz
Smash Champion
As much as I'd love to agree with you, have you seen some of people society tends to think of as rather successful? :x
primes2113
Smash Rookie
The point is that you could potentially ruin somebodies moment/experience/day by saying the word **** if they, in fact, are **** victims. The pain you may cause by bringing this up is real pain. Whether you think that it's foolish and weak or not. The amount of people who have been ***** or the nebulosity of term and conditions of "****" are more irrelevant and pointless to consider in this situation when the only thing at stake is choosing to use another word when around people whose history you have no idea about versus potentially alienating people who want to get involved with SSBM.
MookieRah
Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
There are a lot of factors involved when it comes to trying to figure out an accurate statistic on **** and trying to determine the amount of unreported cases of ****. I don't think it's an easy task to try and quantify, and at the end of the day we get a ballpark percentage. I don't think the definition of **** is one of those factors though, it's actually quite clear. That is sex without consent.
Yeah, very much a tangent considering we are talking about **** victims and not false accusations of ****.
MikeHaggarTHAKJB
Smash Master
The false assumption made here is that somebody from a minority group hears a word that may be associated with slander towards that group will get offended, even if it obviously isn't the purpose of the expression of the word.
Right now I probably need to point out again (even though I shouldn't have) that I am myself part of a minoity group, the mentally ill (please refer to my old post before making stupid assumptions).
Should I take offense everytime somebody uses the word "insane"? (look at the original meaning of the word)
No. If you do, you need to stop being a ***** and take the words people say for what they mean by them.
Right now I probably need to point out again (even though I shouldn't have) that I am myself part of a minoity group, the mentally ill (please refer to my old post before making stupid assumptions).
Should I take offense everytime somebody uses the word "insane"? (look at the original meaning of the word)
No. If you do, you need to stop being a ***** and take the words people say for what they mean by them.
wow, kill yourself
I R MarF
Smash Ace
Whatever happened to just striving to be a good person?
You have a choice:
a) Use a word to describe something which could potentially be offensive to a certain group
b) Use a word to describe something which isn't potentially offensive while, otherwise, getting the same point across
What reason do you have not to go with b? Regardless of your personal opinions, I feel like opting to never offend anyone should take precedence.
You have a choice:
a) Use a word to describe something which could potentially be offensive to a certain group
b) Use a word to describe something which isn't potentially offensive while, otherwise, getting the same point across
What reason do you have not to go with b? Regardless of your personal opinions, I feel like opting to never offend anyone should take precedence.
D
Deleted member
Guest
From a logical standpoint, there is no argument. However, people are more complex than that. Simplifying the perspective may be useful as conjecture, but holding the expectation that human people will always function on logic alone is a good way to ensure your own disappointment in the long run. It may be better to accept that unfavorable circumstances that are out of one's control are going to happen and to deal with them with grace and moderation. Easier said than done obviously, but that's already self-evident being in this thread isn't it?
Oh it's actually really easy to just lie down and take it. You don't have to do anything. And usually, when you speak up about it, things get much worse before there's any indication they'll get better. It's usually better just not to rock the boat. For your own good.
But that doesn't really solve the problem, and usually the people that actually think the best bet is to grin and bear it, are not the people who have to do the grinning and bearing.