Misappropriation, Silencing, and Shut Downs
For the past few days, I have been trying to think of how to write this post, but have been too ill to think coherently, much less write. But I think this needs to be said, otherwise the time for anything to be said will have passed.
I've been noticing a startling trend of how debaters will attempt to shut down a conversation through tactics such as 1.) misappropriating comments and deliberating shifting or altering their original meaning, 2.) choosing to respond to very specific and small parts of arguments without considering the rest of the argument, 3.) resorting to ad hominem attacks and 4.) bringing up issues that are not actually relevant to the debate itself, 5.) attempting to delegitimize the validity of an argument, and 6.) rely on outright, unwarranted hostility.
These are just some of the tactics that I've noticed in debates such as when an idiot attempted to misappropriate my words in order to attack someone with them, when Fail!Feminist decided to come onto the Genderfail discussion and shut us down and when Ginmar and I had our debate over education, privilege, and class.
Lately, there's been a lot of wank on Somarium, so the mods decided to make a post to allow everyone to air out their feelings/grievances/etc. to try and clear things up. Someone posted and said that rape is not funny, and the OP does not like how it is joked about in the OOC chat, or the fact that when players who are offended by the rape jokes speak up about their discomfort, they are "told off." A male player responds and says that "either everything is okay, or nothing is", and in the same post compares someone's discomfort over rape with his own discomfort over cannibalism, as though those things can even be compared. Naturally, I am upset by this insinuation, and respond with how rape and cannibalism can't be compared, and why rape is not funny. I should note that I did not say it should be censored, or that people are not allowed do whatever they want, but that I felt it was important for people to understand what they are doing when they do tell a rape joke.
Immediately, I was told that this is not a discussion the OP wants to have, that my comment was extremely condescending, and that I am allowing a "demonized concept of rape" to cripple me and everyone around me.
To be honest, I was shocked, as I had written that post very carefully, and had taken great care to say that I didn't want to censor anyone, I just wanted people to be aware of the effects and the impact rape jokes do have, not just on rape victims, but on the audience that is listening to them and the culture it is creating. When you laugh at a rape joke, or make a rape joke, you are essentially laughing at or making rape the butt of your jokes. I will be writing a far longer piece on why rape is not funny (or hot, for that matter, for all those fanfic writers who glorify it), and how rape jokes and rape culture in America leads directly to an increase in violence against women and a rise in rape and sexual assault through the normalization of it, so that will not be discussed here.
In any case, the conversation was frozen, but a commenter took it upon herself to move it here and accuses me of trying to silence people through fearmongering and insisting that rape is just a "word"." She also accuses me of "bullying people." In the same thread, the OP also tells me I am bullying people, and turning a conversation into a "rant on something else entirely." Meanwhile, someone else starts a thread here and says that she doesn't "think that anybody should be allowed to use [trauma] as a crutch to shut people up." (But when an Anon comments with some pretty valid points, due to their snarky language, they are shut down pretty fast.)
What is important to acknowledge here is the fact that my initial post was addressing two things: 1.) the fact that rape is not comparable to cannibalism, and that 2.) it is important to understand what rape jokes do, if you are going to tell them.
Somehow the above was misappropriated and contorted into me trying to 1.) silence people, 2.) shut people down, and 3.) censor people by lecturing, being condescending, and using far too much of an academic approach, which is somehow tantamount to me stroking my own academic ego and starting wank (apparently having a very objective stance on an issue and refusing to let someone silence me on the issue is wank. Somehow I missed a memo on what wank even is! Excuse me for not backing down and wanting to debate and have a dialogue, a conversation, on the issue itself). I was told that my argument was not appropriate and that it was not legitimate when I was directly responding to the OP's choice of trying to make a comparison between someone's discomfort with rape jokes, versus his own discomfort with cannibalism. Nowhere in my post do I ever mention that I feel people should be censored.
Yet somehow, that is what the vast majority of the main argument thread ended up being about despite me repeatedly reiterating the fact that I was not trying to censor anyone, and only wanted people to think about what it was they are saying and to consider being more considerate and kind to other players. I only wanted people to be more aware of what they are saying and what happens when they do speak. Yet despite continuously restating this fact very clearly, the tactics mentioned above were ones that were consistently and repeatedly used in order to try and silence me, shut me down, and force me to give up my stance.
What was probably the most astounding thing about all this was when another victim of rape accused me of attacking her by trying to lecture her on rape and treat her like she's stupid by "flaunting statistics."
...What? Come again? I wasn't even aware my initial post was even directed at her. I thought it was directing the issue of cannibal jokes vs rape jokes, as well as understanding what rape jokes do. Uh? What? (It should be noted that this is the same person who accuses me of "demonizing" rape, "heightening" my experience with rape, attempts to tell me I am wrong for framing a critique on rape issues in the only language I am capable of using to critique it, tries to delegitimize my argument and tell me how I am inappropriate at every turn, and tries to accuse me of focusing on semantics and the language of rape as opposed to epistemological issues and the performativity of a rape joke. I should also mention that this individual IMed me later on and told me I had no right to criticize privilege or white male privilege because I am also privileged. Apparently I need to have no privilege whatsoever in order to be allowed to critique it. Yeah. Okay. Right.)
What I realize, more than ever, is that on highly polarizing issues, especially on issues such as rape or violence to women, when you speak out against the dominant/more popular view on the issue, the majority will try to crush you to get you to either shut up or to see their point of view through all the methods above.
They will also brand you as someone who is "insane" and "batshit crazy." Isn't that just wonderful.
This is the truth: not everything is okay or nothing is. Everything is okay when it is in line with the majority's political views and beliefs, regardless of how much the performance of those beliefs, through the telling of "off-color" jokes (which is really another term for hate speech cast in "humorous language") really ends up hurting people in the game. But if you happen to be someone who does not agree with the majority and speaks out against it, you need to shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down because your concerns are not appropriate or valid, and your argument is not legitimate in a conversation about what is or is not appropriate in a public chat.
Everyone can say whatever they want except for those who do not support the majority's views. And that's just how it is.
I've been noticing a startling trend of how debaters will attempt to shut down a conversation through tactics such as 1.) misappropriating comments and deliberating shifting or altering their original meaning, 2.) choosing to respond to very specific and small parts of arguments without considering the rest of the argument, 3.) resorting to ad hominem attacks and 4.) bringing up issues that are not actually relevant to the debate itself, 5.) attempting to delegitimize the validity of an argument, and 6.) rely on outright, unwarranted hostility.
These are just some of the tactics that I've noticed in debates such as when an idiot attempted to misappropriate my words in order to attack someone with them, when Fail!Feminist decided to come onto the Genderfail discussion and shut us down and when Ginmar and I had our debate over education, privilege, and class.
Lately, there's been a lot of wank on Somarium, so the mods decided to make a post to allow everyone to air out their feelings/grievances/etc. to try and clear things up. Someone posted and said that rape is not funny, and the OP does not like how it is joked about in the OOC chat, or the fact that when players who are offended by the rape jokes speak up about their discomfort, they are "told off." A male player responds and says that "either everything is okay, or nothing is", and in the same post compares someone's discomfort over rape with his own discomfort over cannibalism, as though those things can even be compared. Naturally, I am upset by this insinuation, and respond with how rape and cannibalism can't be compared, and why rape is not funny. I should note that I did not say it should be censored, or that people are not allowed do whatever they want, but that I felt it was important for people to understand what they are doing when they do tell a rape joke.
Immediately, I was told that this is not a discussion the OP wants to have, that my comment was extremely condescending, and that I am allowing a "demonized concept of rape" to cripple me and everyone around me.
To be honest, I was shocked, as I had written that post very carefully, and had taken great care to say that I didn't want to censor anyone, I just wanted people to be aware of the effects and the impact rape jokes do have, not just on rape victims, but on the audience that is listening to them and the culture it is creating. When you laugh at a rape joke, or make a rape joke, you are essentially laughing at or making rape the butt of your jokes. I will be writing a far longer piece on why rape is not funny (or hot, for that matter, for all those fanfic writers who glorify it), and how rape jokes and rape culture in America leads directly to an increase in violence against women and a rise in rape and sexual assault through the normalization of it, so that will not be discussed here.
In any case, the conversation was frozen, but a commenter took it upon herself to move it here and accuses me of trying to silence people through fearmongering and insisting that rape is just a "word"." She also accuses me of "bullying people." In the same thread, the OP also tells me I am bullying people, and turning a conversation into a "rant on something else entirely." Meanwhile, someone else starts a thread here and says that she doesn't "think that anybody should be allowed to use [trauma] as a crutch to shut people up." (But when an Anon comments with some pretty valid points, due to their snarky language, they are shut down pretty fast.)
What is important to acknowledge here is the fact that my initial post was addressing two things: 1.) the fact that rape is not comparable to cannibalism, and that 2.) it is important to understand what rape jokes do, if you are going to tell them.
Somehow the above was misappropriated and contorted into me trying to 1.) silence people, 2.) shut people down, and 3.) censor people by lecturing, being condescending, and using far too much of an academic approach, which is somehow tantamount to me stroking my own academic ego and starting wank (apparently having a very objective stance on an issue and refusing to let someone silence me on the issue is wank. Somehow I missed a memo on what wank even is! Excuse me for not backing down and wanting to debate and have a dialogue, a conversation, on the issue itself). I was told that my argument was not appropriate and that it was not legitimate when I was directly responding to the OP's choice of trying to make a comparison between someone's discomfort with rape jokes, versus his own discomfort with cannibalism. Nowhere in my post do I ever mention that I feel people should be censored.
Yet somehow, that is what the vast majority of the main argument thread ended up being about despite me repeatedly reiterating the fact that I was not trying to censor anyone, and only wanted people to think about what it was they are saying and to consider being more considerate and kind to other players. I only wanted people to be more aware of what they are saying and what happens when they do speak. Yet despite continuously restating this fact very clearly, the tactics mentioned above were ones that were consistently and repeatedly used in order to try and silence me, shut me down, and force me to give up my stance.
What was probably the most astounding thing about all this was when another victim of rape accused me of attacking her by trying to lecture her on rape and treat her like she's stupid by "flaunting statistics."
...What? Come again? I wasn't even aware my initial post was even directed at her. I thought it was directing the issue of cannibal jokes vs rape jokes, as well as understanding what rape jokes do. Uh? What? (It should be noted that this is the same person who accuses me of "demonizing" rape, "heightening" my experience with rape, attempts to tell me I am wrong for framing a critique on rape issues in the only language I am capable of using to critique it, tries to delegitimize my argument and tell me how I am inappropriate at every turn, and tries to accuse me of focusing on semantics and the language of rape as opposed to epistemological issues and the performativity of a rape joke. I should also mention that this individual IMed me later on and told me I had no right to criticize privilege or white male privilege because I am also privileged. Apparently I need to have no privilege whatsoever in order to be allowed to critique it. Yeah. Okay. Right.)
What I realize, more than ever, is that on highly polarizing issues, especially on issues such as rape or violence to women, when you speak out against the dominant/more popular view on the issue, the majority will try to crush you to get you to either shut up or to see their point of view through all the methods above.
They will also brand you as someone who is "insane" and "batshit crazy." Isn't that just wonderful.
This is the truth: not everything is okay or nothing is. Everything is okay when it is in line with the majority's political views and beliefs, regardless of how much the performance of those beliefs, through the telling of "off-color" jokes (which is really another term for hate speech cast in "humorous language") really ends up hurting people in the game. But if you happen to be someone who does not agree with the majority and speaks out against it, you need to shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down because your concerns are not appropriate or valid, and your argument is not legitimate in a conversation about what is or is not appropriate in a public chat.
Everyone can say whatever they want except for those who do not support the majority's views. And that's just how it is.