|
|
Post by sidhekin on Aug 1, 2013 18:34:15 GMT
Murder is killing with intent and forethought. I thought it was "unlawful killing of another human being". You know, so as to include neither the lawful killing with intent of forethought of human beings (executions, acts of war) nor the unlawful killing with intent and forethought of plants and (non-human) animals (poaching etc). Eh, I feel like arguing a bit: Sure, you can extend it from "human" to "intelligent sentient being with human level intelligence". I still don't think you'll find it unlawful: I doubt there is any applicable law. And if you drop the requirement of unlawfulness, not only will you include executions and acts of war among murders, you're edging close to the "meat is murder" ideas, in which case most of us are murderers ,,, |
|
|
|
Post by legion on Aug 1, 2013 19:35:05 GMT
We are all heterotrophs, all doomed to consume other lifeforms to thrive.
|
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Aug 1, 2013 19:43:09 GMT
For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled. -H.S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Aug 1, 2013 20:43:47 GMT
It is not definitely established whether or not Rey is killing Hetty. (That's likely to change within the next couple updates.)
What he's doing definitely qualifies as battery, though. Also vandalism, potentially arson.
He could have grabbed Hetty in his mouth, gone to Adam, and started talking to him. I know if that if a talking canid comes up to me and tells me to order the doll he's carrying to not kill anyone, I'm likely to follow those instructions. (After some "hey, a talking dog/wolf/whatever!".)
|
|
|
|
Post by todd on Aug 1, 2013 22:17:32 GMT
Everybody was okay with 'floating octopus in the Forest', but somehow Hetty is just a contrivance? Please! I thought the octopus scenes felt more suited to a gag webcomic than to a mostly serious story about a young girl investigating the mysteries of a strange boarding school, but I suspected I'd be outvoted, so I didn't mention it at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Eversist on Aug 2, 2013 1:51:02 GMT
I think Tom does random shit with enough of a regular irregularity (hah), so again, I didn't mind it much.
I think my fangirl-ness is clouding my judgement a bit, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by diloolie on Aug 2, 2013 4:45:30 GMT
Let me tell you a story Annie, Real nice girl, porcelain fanny. From a distance, looks like a tranny, So small she fits into every nook and cranny. Said her name was Hetty, We were going steady, Then she wants to torture children, Damn girl, I'm not ready. Couldn't tell at first glance, That you had a big catch, Oh silly, clumsy, little me, Did I drop that lit match? I'd like to know why you decided using a slur was appropriate here? I normally only lurk, but I cannot let this slide. Did you not think that maybe some members are trans*? |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Aug 2, 2013 6:08:50 GMT
Let me tell you a story Annie, Real nice girl, porcelain fanny. From a distance, looks like a tranny, So small she fits into every nook and cranny. Said her name was Hetty, We were going steady, Then she wants to torture children, Damn girl, I'm not ready. Couldn't tell at first glance, That you had a big catch, Oh silly, clumsy, little me, Did I drop that lit match? I'd like to know why you decided using a slur was appropriate here? I normally only lurk, but I cannot let this slide. Did you not think that maybe some members are trans*? Slur? Um... Oh, I think maybe you're objecting to "looks like a tranny". I could understand Hetty being offended, because really she looks nothing like a transmission. But I seriously doubt that we have any transmissions among the forum readers - the one or two beings from Mechanicsburg notwithstanding. I specifically doubt that you are a transmission. I doubt that you can find a transmission that take offense at being referred to by a shortened form of the word, or a good reason to consider that shortened form an insult or slur. And, if I am correct that you are not a transmission yourself, I doubt that any transmissions have given you their blessing or approval to take umbrage on their behalf. |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Aug 2, 2013 7:21:15 GMT
I'd like to know why you decided using a slur was appropriate here? I normally only lurk, but I cannot let this slide. Did you not think that maybe some members are trans*? I was not aware that "tranny" was a slur until this moment, and I was also running under the unconscious assumption that any transvestites who happened to run across it would have a sense of humor well-developed enough to not take it in an offensive manner. Apparently I have encountered an exception. I apologize if I have offended you, I assure you it was unintentional. |
|
|
|
Post by diloolie on Aug 2, 2013 7:43:08 GMT
I'd like to know why you decided using a slur was appropriate here? I normally only lurk, but I cannot let this slide. Did you not think that maybe some members are trans*? Slur? Um... Oh, I think maybe you're objecting to "looks like a tranny". I could understand Hetty being offended, because really she looks nothing like a transmission. But I seriously doubt that we have any transmissions among the forum readers - the one or two beings from Mechanicsburg notwithstanding. I specifically doubt that you are a transmission. I doubt that you can find a transmission that take offense at being referred to by a shortened form of the word, or a good reason to consider that shortened form an insult or slur. And, if I am correct that you are not a transmission yourself, I doubt that any transmissions have given you their blessing or approval to take umbrage on their behalf. ...really. I'd like to know why you decided using a slur was appropriate here? I normally only lurk, but I cannot let this slide. Did you not think that maybe some members are trans*? I was not aware that "tranny" was a slur until this moment, and I was also running under the unconscious assumption that any transvestites who happened to run across it would have a sense of humor well-developed enough to not take it in an offensive manner. Apparently I have encountered an exception. I apologize if I have offended you, I assure you it was unintentional. That word is used against transgendered people and is an excuse for murder. There's no way to have a sense of humor 'well-developed' enough to laugh about such things. It isn't a lack of humor, it's that the word is not funny. |
|
|
|
Post by legion on Aug 2, 2013 7:46:04 GMT
"Tranny" is indeed considered a slur; though I personally have nothing against people using it jokingly, *as long as* they are fully aware that it can be perceived really offensively by many people.
(I'd like to think we can joke about anything, even the worst of the worst, as long as we're doing so with the full knowledge that not everyone will enjoy this kind of humor, and some will indeed be really shocked by it, and shouldn't be ridiculed for that; poor taste is not a fellony; neither is being offended by poor taste)
(Sometimes I'm surprisingly optimist and ideallistic)
|
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Aug 2, 2013 7:51:17 GMT
I doubt that you can find a transmission that take offense at being referred to by a shortened form of the word, or a good reason to consider that shortened form an insult or slur. And, if I am correct that you are not a transmission yourself, I doubt that any transmissions have given you their blessing or approval to take umbrage on their behalf. In the place of transvestite, transgender is generally the accepted term within the LGBT community, with 'trans*' being the shortened form of the word. 'Tranny' is often seen as derogatory. Actually, plenty of transfolk do in fact take umbrage with it, have been vocal about it, and they still have to see it everywhere because people the term doesn't apply to don't see it as offensive and continue to use it with the classic battlecry of 'political correctness run amuck'. Since this is the internet, I must clarify that I say this not with sharpened teeth; I always see it as better to inform than to judge for being unaware. (It's always safer to assume the person in question is genuinely unaware rather than perfectly aware and intentionally malevolent. My hopes in humanity stay relatively higher utilizing that method, as more people seem to just be outside of that admittedly quite squared-off loop.)
|
|
|
|
Post by philman on Aug 2, 2013 7:54:42 GMT
I see diloolie's point, to those who are transgendered, it has been used in the past as a derogatory term, much like 'queer' or 'faggot' was used commonly in the past against the gay community, but are now considered not ok to use.
None of us would condone referring to Kat as 'the faggot character'.
Other minorities have started to take those terms back, but the transgendered community is smaller, and by it's very nature, and is often less accepted by the general population.
|
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Aug 2, 2013 7:55:00 GMT
"Tranny" is indeed considered a slur; though I personally have nothing against people using it jokingly, *as long as* they are fully aware that it can be perceived really offensively by many people. (I'd like to think we can joke about anything, even the worst of the worst, as long as we're doing so with the full knowledge that not everyone will enjoy this kind of humor, and some will indeed be really shocked by it, and shouldn't be ridiculed for that; poor taste is not a fellony; neither is being offended by poor taste) (Sometimes I'm surprisingly optimist and ideallistic) I'd wager it's akin to n-word privileges. 'Queer' is another word that the community has taken back control over, removing its power in a sense, but it's still rather offensive for anyone outside said group to use because then it's easily construed as being intentionally offensive and demeaning. |
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Aug 2, 2013 7:56:09 GMT
Is there an alert-system that tells you when someone else has posted whilst creating a post? I feel like a tape-recorder at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ophel on Aug 2, 2013 8:04:53 GMT
Everybody was okay with 'floating octopus in the Forest', but somehow Hetty is just a contrivance? Please! I thought the octopus scenes felt more suited to a gag webcomic than to a mostly serious story about a young girl investigating the mysteries of a strange boarding school, but I suspected I'd be outvoted, so I didn't mention it at the time. I imagine the reason being so was that the octopus was for the funny, which isn't supposed to be taken too seriously. It might have been endearing at the end, but it was humour. Hetty, on the other hand, was introduced for the drama. Seriousness. We expect to have some sort of... development? Commitment? And I suppose we're put off by it since it's more or less treated like it wasn't serious and so get one-shot off. That's what I think.
In my opinion though, I am apathetic to both. I don't really mind, but when it comes to these things, I jump into the story head-first, with my thoughts switched off, and enjoy the experience (unless I'm feeling cynical).
Anyway, I like to have some light humour put in now and again. |
|
|
|
Post by diloolie on Aug 2, 2013 8:08:14 GMT
I appreciate those who're offering support. Many of my close friends are trans* and have had that word hurled at them when being kicked out of their homes by once-loving parents, or used when they're denied work, or being solicited for ...other work..., or just harassed and attacked on the streets. I can never accept it being used flippantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Aug 2, 2013 11:17:53 GMT
I appreciate those who're offering support. Many of my close friends are trans* and have had that word hurled at them when being kicked out of their homes by once-loving parents, or used when they're denied work, or being solicited for ...other work..., or just harassed and attacked on the streets. I can never accept it being used flippantly. Well, I hope you can rest a little easier knowing I did not intend to condone bigotry, assault, or murder by using a certain word in a crude limerick, mainly because no other word came quickly to mind, or rhymed. My younger sister was born a woman and decided later that she wanted to be a man, so it's not like it isn't something I'm familiar with, and it's not as though I purposefully put it in there because I wanted to degrade people. Words are words. It's how people use them that matters. If it's used in a hateful context, of course you should be offended, but if it's used in jest, you should probably find another hill to die on. |
|
|
|
Post by diloolie on Aug 3, 2013 7:01:59 GMT
I appreciate those who're offering support. Many of my close friends are trans* and have had that word hurled at them when being kicked out of their homes by once-loving parents, or used when they're denied work, or being solicited for ...other work..., or just harassed and attacked on the streets. I can never accept it being used flippantly. Well, I hope you can rest a little easier knowing I did not intend to condone bigotry, assault, or murder by using a certain word in a crude limerick, mainly because no other word came quickly to mind, or rhymed. My younger sister was born a woman and decided later that she wanted to be a man, so it's not like it isn't something I'm familiar with, and it's not as though I purposefully put it in there because I wanted to degrade people. Words are words. It's how people use them that matters. If it's used in a hateful context, of course you should be offended, but if it's used in jest, you should probably find another hill to die on. I fail to understand how you say you don't condone bigotry and then go on to say that words are words. If words had no power, nobody would be saying that it's a slur and there wouldn't be swaths of essays talking about the history of this and other slurs. Dismissing the effects of slurs because your erred in using one seems more like the opposite. There is no joking context about people's lives when you use a part of their identity in mockery. Mocking a persons religion is highly taboo for this reason. Religion, same as gender identity, is a closely personal issue. I hope I am expressing this correctly, because I want to avoid misunderstandings and dragging this out further would be derailing the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by legion on Aug 3, 2013 8:16:14 GMT
"Mocking a persons religion is highly taboo for this reason."
Certainly not where I live or among any of the circles of people I frequent on the internet; making fun of Christians is entirely fair game; Jews less so, but for historical reasons; Muslims are more than welcome targets; other religions are less often made fun of but mostly through lack of familiarity.
I hate this idea that "words have powers", no, words are arbitrary assemlages of sounds/symbols, they have no inherent, absolute, universal value, and what they do to someone is a matter of individual subjectivity (the word "lame" is offensive to some people, but to more people it's perfectly innocuous, and to the vast majority of people in the world who do not speak English, it means and conveys absolutely nothing at all).
"Words have powers" is a supersitition and an unfortunate survival of Protestant ideas (see "Sola Scriptura") into western secular thought; it's a nocive idea and the tool of pernicious censorship in the western world, and it really needs to die.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marnath on Aug 3, 2013 11:32:46 GMT
My younger sister was born a woman and decided later that she wanted to be a man, No, just stop. Posting something like that while trying to argue you're not a bigot is a bad way to make people believe you. Trans people do not "decide" they "want" to be the opposite gender from their physical sex,they discover that they are. Saying otherwise makes you look ignorant and bigoted. |
|
|
|
Post by Per on Aug 3, 2013 12:52:54 GMT
For my own part I was surprised to see that it was the word "tranny" and not "fanny" that people found offensive. If the one isn't so bad in your respective parts of the world, could you allow for the possibility that the other similarly isn't charged elsewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by SerenaJo on Aug 3, 2013 17:21:38 GMT
Edit: Whyyy do I get involved in things like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by philman on Aug 3, 2013 19:33:18 GMT
"Mocking a persons religion is highly taboo for this reason." Certainly not where I live or among any of the circles of people I frequent on the internet; making fun of Christians is entirely fair game; Jews less so, but for historical reasons; Muslims are more than welcome targets; other religions are less often made fun of but mostly through lack of familiarity. I hate this idea that "words have powers", no, words are arbitrary assemlages of sounds/symbols, they have no inherent, absolute, universal value, and what they do to someone is a matter of individual subjectivity (the word "lame" is offensive to some people, but to more people it's perfectly innocuous, and to the vast majority of people in the world who do not speak English, it means and conveys absolutely nothing at all). "Words have powers" is a supersitition and an unfortunate survival of Protestant ideas (see "Sola Scriptura") into western secular thought; it's a nocive idea and the tool of pernicious censorship in the western world, and it really needs to die. Surely this goes against your above point that words don't have power, you don't make fun of jews for historical reasons, but it's fine to make fun of transexuals, despite them being treated more or less the same way during that same time period. For my own part I was surprised to see that it was the word "tranny" and not "fanny" that people found offensive. If the one isn't so bad in your respective parts of the world, could you allow for the possibility that the other similarly isn't charged elsewhere? I had a double-take when I saw the word 'fanny' too until I remembered it means something different on the american side of the pond. And saying words don't have power is just an excuse for people to use bad/offensive language with no recourse. 'Tranny' may not be in everyone's mind as offensive, but as I said before, saying someone 'looks like a tranny' shouldn't be acceptable while saying someone 'looks faggoty' or 'looks like a paki' definately isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by thedoomblahsong on Aug 3, 2013 19:42:18 GMT
My two cents: words do have power. Slurs are offensive because they represent a hateful ideology. We can and should reject such words in order to make clear that the ideology is not acceptable. The problem is, no word has just one universally accepted definition, and whenever a disagreement arises over definition, it's the speaker's (writer's) intention that should count. It seems to me that the word 'tranny' has been reclaimed by a lot of people, and there's no use trying to force those people to accept a different definition. There are no 'right' definitions, a word means what every significant minority understands it to mean. As the history of our own language (and of every other language) will attest, people are going to use a word the way they want, and perceive it how they want, and fifty years later the dictionary will change accordingly. A dictionary's job is to reflect the various ways people use a word, not the other way around.
It's your own responsibility, of course, to make sure your intention is clear, to be aware of the most common meanings a word has, and to avoid offending others. That's why everybody should be aware that 'tranny' is considered a slur by many (probably most? I don't know the stats). I also agree GK Sierra should not have used the word flippantly on an internet forum. You should avoid the word whenever you don't know your audience. I'm just saying that words have multiple definitions, and rather than arguing about them, we should just be aware of them, and the speaker's intention matters above all else.
Hope I'm making sense >.>
|
|
|
|
Post by The Anarch on Aug 3, 2013 19:52:17 GMT
Words, being abstract human-made constructs, have only as much power as people give them.
PS, I am amazed that this conversation is still ongoing. Can you imagine what might have happened if Sierra had intentionally been trying to offend someone? lol internet
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightice on Aug 3, 2013 20:00:17 GMT
Words, being abstract human-made constructs, have only as much power as people give them. That they are. And we are human, so they are extra-effective on us. Saying that words have no power because they are completely abstract is meaningless when the entire human psychology runs on the same abstractions that words seek to express. You can make a living with nothing but words, they can make a person a hero or criminal. Nearly all human interaction primarily consists of words, aided with some non-verbal cues. In short, we need to give considerable power to words just to be able to function normally in the society. |
|
|
|
Post by The Anarch on Aug 3, 2013 20:06:07 GMT
And we are human, so they are extra-effective on us. Nope, only as effective as we allow them to be. |
|
|
|
Post by legion on Aug 3, 2013 20:47:49 GMT
Surely this goes against your above point that words don't have power, you don't make fun of jews for historical reasons, but it's fine to make fun of transexuals, despite them being treated more or less the same way during that same time period. You misunderstood: I was describing the attitudes I encounter in various places that contradict the claim that making fun of religion is taboo; this isn't my experience. It's somewhat less true for Jews but this isn't my attitude, I have personnally no problem to joke about Jews (or anyone else). I happen to be some manner of dangerously radical anarchist who think that any sort of speech is fair game (at most, if a word has direct, provable negative consequences, the speaker can be held accountable for these consequences, but not just for the word in itself), in stark contrast with the vast majority of people who "believe in freedom of speech except for [ideas they disagree with]", a conception by which they find themself in agreement with the view on freedom of speech held by all dictators ever (did you know that the constitution of North Korea explicitely uphelds the right to freedom of speech, with the sole exception of speech that might threaten the Korean State?) Even barring genuine hateful discourse, the restriction on certain words in practice also apply to people who use these words naturally without the intent to offend anyone (like happened in this thread), and to people who do parody of or humor around hateful speech (not hateful humor, humor that uses hateful codes to turn them around); in practice what is going on is not a fight against hateful speech, but the instauration of taboo-words-that-you-must-never-say-or-else I live in a country where Jewish artists have been condemnned for antisemitism because they were using the codes of antisemitism in a humorous way, and were several humorous newspapers have been banned or ruined by trials done on the ground of defamation laws. So don't talk to me about the "power of words". It's just an excuse for censorship that doesn't have the balls to call itself censorship. Speech should be fought with speech, not with laws or taboos. |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Aug 3, 2013 20:53:42 GMT
I hate this idea that "words have powers", no, words are arbitrary assemblages of sounds/symbols, they have no inherent, absolute, universal value, and what they do to someone is a matter of individual subjectivity (the word "lame" is offensive to some people, but to more people it's perfectly innocuous, and to the vast majority of people in the world who do not speak English, it means and conveys absolutely nothing at all). "Words have powers" is a superstition and an unfortunate survival of Protestant ideas (see "Sola Scriptura") into western secular thought; it's a novice idea and the tool of pernicious censorship in the western world, and it really needs to die. +1 Everything that I wanted to say, and more. My younger sister was born a woman and decided later that she wanted to be a man, No, just stop. Posting something like that while trying to argue you're not a bigot is a bad way to make people believe you. Trans people do not "decide" they "want" to be the opposite gender from their physical sex,they discover that they are. Saying otherwise makes you look ignorant and bigoted. You know what I meant. If you wanted the correct terminology you'd have to ask her, and she only lurks, so good luck getting an answer. She doesn't give six fucks from Sunday that I phrased it like that. Whether it was "discovered" or "revealed" or "decided", it doesn't really matter, the point I was TRYING to make is that I would love her if she was a six-eyed purple wombat that wanted to be a giraffe with rocket feet, and I wouldn't judge anyone else for doing the same, so why should I care in the slightest if she or anyone else wants a sex swap? Can you imagine what might have happened if Sierra had intentionally been trying to offend someone? lol internet Judging from the wide variety of individuals here, I can only guess at the response. Gaskets would be blown. Heads would a-splode. Tears would flow. |
|
