TR Forums

On 2002-03-14 13:56, Nelliesboo wrote:
Anyone who can not take the Heat do not walk into the Fire "Simple, Easy, DONE"

Just by saying this, you're slipping into the attitude that several of us have questioned the necessity of.

Whether someone can "take the Heat" or not is not the issue. It's whether there's any point or reason that people feel the need to cross a certain line in their smack talk. Sure, the line is different for everybody, but I think that there's a general region that a lot of people would agree is "too far". My personal feelings are that gaming is fun. Talking a certain amount of smack can be fun. Insulting or denigrating people to an extreme is not fun.

If you feel it makes me less "manly" or "weaker" because I don't want to "take the Heat" then I feel sorry for you. Really. Note that I'm paraphrasing some here, and assuming that that's what you meant by your statement, but that's certainly the tone that I understood it to be in.

Who cares if someone "can't take the Heat"? Some of us just want to play the game. We don't care about "the Heat" and find it annoying, juvenile, and childish.

-Polare

Let's see, the excuses seem to fall into several categories:

1. Everyone does it
2. It's part of gaming (a variant on #1)
3. No one takes offense at it
4. It isn't offensive, it's just degrading (a variant on #3)
5. We don't say "bitch," we say "beeyotch"

Taking these one at a time, #1 would seem to have lost its appeal as an excuse even before "I was ordered to do it" fell from acceptability; most of the children I know are aware that it's not a valid excuse. It is no more an excuse when "everyone" is exchanged for "some women," for reasons which should be obvious with little thought. Its variant, #2, fails the acceptability test for the same reason. When I was in high school, it was part of being a jock to beat up on suspected gays; this expectation affects the legitimacy of the action not at all, as the Marines found out with their "traditional" hazing a few years ago.

As far as #3 goes, I was under the distinct impression that I'd indicated that <i>I</i> take offense at it; or are you arguing that having driven off all those who are offended by an activity somehow renders that activity acceptable? The variant of this one, #4, merely replaces "offensive" with "degrading" and assumes the second is reasonable whien the first is not; this is really beneath comment, I think.

The last excuse is similarly beneath comment: it might make a convincing argument to a first-grader, but is hardly adequate as an argument among supposed adults.

I don't think it's stupid. I was honestly wondering if any women peruse this site because in my *limited* experience, i have noticed that females tend to be less interested (or perhaps pressured to be less interested) in technology.

There are probably two questions here; in any event, there will be two answers. First, your curiosity is reasonable; my primary objection was to how it was phrased ("gal" is a variant on "girl," which many women regard as demeaning; and as for "chick," I think commentary is unnecessary). It is somewhat akin to my asking, "Are there any little boys here?" - and I suspect you would sneer instead of raise your hand in response to that.

Secondly, it is true that fewer females than males are drawn to technological fields. I will even admit that there may be innate biological reasons which are responsible for some of this bias, although I doubt they are the only reasons. I know many female engineers, scientists and technicians, and more than one woman who builds her own computers. That you don't routinely notice them on websites like this one gives no data on their relative abundance, though; and I think some of the reasons for women keeping their heads down have been dramatically revealed in this thread.

Speed, cRock and Polare, you have all hit nails on the head; thank you.

As to the "political correctness" charge: I don't recall ever saying you couldn't talk smack in your LAN parties; I just expressed a strong opionion about it, and noted that it might be one of the reasons 0oALio0 didn't notice any women around. We <i>do</i> usually "stay out of the kitchen" - and are apparently missed, from some of the comments. You have no one but yourselves to blame.

IMHO if you can't countenance smack-talk or taunting that is not vulgar or profane, then you are probably over-sensitive.

I'm perfectly capable of being at least as vulgar and profane as you are, I'm sure; you've just not seen me in action. When it's necessary, I can (and do) manage quite well, thank you. My point is that it's hardly "necessary" while gaming (as Polare among others has demonstrated); it is simply crude and juvenile behavior that a number of you are defending, and in an outraged fashion at that.

To which I am tempted to reply, if you can't countenance the charges of inexcusably crude and juvenile behavior, then you are probably over-sensitive. (I detest smiley-faces, but I'll make an exception just this one time: )

As to the "political correctness" charge: I don't recall ever saying you couldn't talk smack in your LAN parties; I just expressed a strong opionion about it, and noted that it might be one of the reasons 0oALio0 didn't notice any women around. We do usually "stay out of the kitchen" - and are apparently missed, from some of the comments. You have no one but yourselves to blame.

Amazing how you are perfectly comfortable speaking for an ENTIRE GENDER. Well, if you can do it so can I, right?

What should "we" blame ourselves for? Do you think "we" will agonize late into the evening about our horrible, vulgar male ways? Hey, I'll bet that the majority of us here are white males too, that makes us doubly evil and wrong.

You expressed a "strong opinion" in attempt to show us unenlightened barbaric males the error of our ways. I say once again: if you don't like something, then stay away from it. No one is forcing you to associate with anyone or anything you don't like. This pretty much goes for anybody who does not like the conduct/behavior/actions of anyone else. If you don't think it's necessary, then fine, don't do it. If it really bothers you, avoid the situation. Just don't get pissed off when everyone else does the thing that you don't like. You are complaining to hear yourself complain. You are like the people who go to a rock concert and then complain the next day that the music was too loud.

I find it odd that you have been wandering around these forums with nary a post until now. You could have engaged in any number of discussions about computer hardware/software, but you haven't. This tells me that you aren't as "drawn to technological fields" as you would like us to believe.

So then why are you here? Not sayihg you need to justify yourself....




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vrock on 2002-03-14 21:20 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vrock on 2002-03-14 21:23 ]</font>

On 2002-03-14 21:08, Vrock wrote:
So then why are you here? Not sayihg you need to justify yourself....

Uh... I don't think I even need to point out the oxymoron inherent in that statement...

Vrock, we're not saying that you're evil or wrong, or that you should stop what you do. We'll avoid you on servers, just like we do right now (using "we" and "you" to show the two 'sides' in this thread). The original question, though, was 'why aren't there many women gamers?'. That's the whole point of this discussion. That's what we're trying to answer -- that we feel more women feel our way than your way. We're trying to explain it to you so you gain a greater understanding, to answer the original question.

Nobody's said that you should stop being who you are.

-Polare

Amazing how you are perfectly comfortable speaking for an ENTIRE GENDER

What is truly amazing is your ability to read in things which aren't there. If you'd be gracious enough to point out where I've spoken for an entire gender, I'll apologize - but until then, I'll accuse you of creating a straw man to fight.

What should "we" blame ourselves for? Do you think "we" will agonize late into the evening about our horrible, vulgar male ways? Hey, I'll bet that the majority of us here are white males too, that makes us doubly evil and wrong.

You expressed a "strong opinion" in attempt to show us unenlightened barbaric males the error of our ways.

I have no interest in whether you blame yourself, nor what for; I was simply answering a question, and commenting on the nature of that question. I wasn't trying to show you the error of your ways, either, and furthermore your ethnic background is of no interest whatsoever to me, nor is it relevant to this discussion (you brought it up, not I).

I think it is interesting (more than that: fascinating, on a sociological level) that my comments have roused such anger in a few people. I think it no accident that they are precisely those people who are so enamored of "talking smack" to their gaming opponents, and I suggest a significant correlation there. I leave it for you to fill in the blanks - you seem to be good at that - while I content myself with holding up the mirror.

I find it odd that you have been wandering around these forums with nary a post until now. You could have engaged in any number of discussions about computer hardware/software, but you haven't. This tells me that you aren't as "drawn to technological fields" as you would like us to believe.

So then why are you here? Not sayihg you need to justify yourself....

First, let me note that Polare has again demonstrated his good aim.

Now, why do you thing I've been "wandering around these forums" for very long? The fact is that I've only been browsing them for a few days - I registered after a couple of days' browsing, and you can see when that was. I've posted occasionally since then, on topics of interest to me.

Why did I come to the Tech Report? A good friend of mine frequently posts to this site, and he recommended it to me; I had expressed interest in building my next computer (he built my present one), and he suggested this as the best site on the web for technical information - including the exchange of information, I might add. It saddens me to see that there are some of the same posturing, chest-beating types here as at the other couple of sites I visited. Fortunately, there appear to be some more-respectable people here, also; I hope the balance is positive.

Finally, I don't recall saying that I was "drawn to technology;" I merely stated that some women were. In fact, I was careful to use all the same limiters and qualifiers that I have used all along. But you appear to be blind to those distinctions.

I need not justify myself to anyone. It seems <i>you</i> might be trying to justify your behavior, though; this leads to further fascinating speculation, but I'm out of time right now, so I'll let it go and watch to see which foot you choose next.

this is all pointless talk.....if i go to a public server i never say anything because i dont know anyone, i just play and have fun...but if i am at a Lan Party and there is a Friend (or friends) there that i know very well then we will probly say every dirty word to each other during play. and then laugh about it later, u do not treat everyone the same in life or u would not have many friends. u know what lines to cross and what not to, just like all my friends know the "N" word is off limits if i know someone does not like that kinda of talk then it will never be said but some people do and it will give them a more fun game. Everyone has a way of playing, Respect how they want to play and it will be fun. And as Far as "Anyone who can not take the Heat do not walk into the Fire Simple, Easy, DONE" that means if u see something that u dont like and it will not change leave no one is forcing u to be there i dont think anyone should be disrepected but sometimes u just need to find a new place to play,hangout,work, or go to school.....and blah blah blah because all this will just contuine anyway so owell

Nelliesboo: You and your English Grammar teacher need to have a happy reunion.

Really.....while he is helping me maybe we can come up with a better name for you.....

Not sure of your vintage, Nelliesboo, but my nick is derived from an ancient SNL skit. As for my grammar gripes, chalk that up to my advanced age, when grammar still counted [/ducks flames].

Just so y'all know, I don't care one bit about political correctness. To prove it, I'll answer "I for one get sooooo tired of certain groups of people thinking another certain group of people should change their ways to accomodate the wishes of first group of people" by mentioning that when some "certain groups" have something that you want some of, hell yeah we're going to change our ways! Who you kidding?

The thing that amused me was not the rudeness itself, but the rationalizations that I saw, ostensibly justifying the rudeness. Now when I find myself dancin' like that, I like to ask myself what it is that I really want. Apparently my suggestion of self-examination pushed some buttons!

Again, just for the record, the general response to Tesserae's comment #6319 has been:

1 Challenge for acceptable terms
1 Exception to the rule offered
3 Denials that the words mean anything
1 Change of subject
1 "Everybody's doing it"
0 What can I do to help?

That's before I put my 2 cents in, BTW. Make of it what you will. I'm simply curious if the individuals who took their respective stands would say that it's consistent with how they want to live their lives.

I think it is interesting (more than that: fascinating, on a sociological level) that my comments have roused such anger in a few people

Lady, have you read your first post? It comes off quite huffy and hostile. It's possible that might have SOMETHING to do with a few people getting angry.

It saddens me to see that there are some of the same posturing, chest-beating types here as at the other couple of sites I visited

Pretty direct insult there. Still, if you don't like it, then leave.

Fortunately, there appear to be some more-respectable people here, also; I hope the balance is positive

Implying that those who disagree with you are NOT respectable. That's your erroneous opinion. Again, you veil an insult and then don't understand why people get pissed at you. Amazing.

so I'll let it go and watch to see which foot you choose next.

Whoa, rimshot. Took a while for my slow, Neanderthal mind to understand that one. Another veiled insult. Still wondering why some people are hostile towards you?

I wasn't trying to show you the error of your ways, either,

You weren't trying to show us the error of our ways? So what's this:

We do usually "stay out of the kitchen"... You have no one but yourselves to blame.

This one is nice too. I'm so sorry for posting something you weren't interested in or didn't feel was part of the discussion. Please forgive me.

I have no interest in whether you blame yourself, nor what for...and furthermore your ethnic background is of no interest whatsoever to me, nor is it relevant to this discussion

That's nice. I have no interest in what "saddens" you, as a matter of fact, I have no interest at all in anything you have to say about this issue. I'm bowing out here. If I wanted to hear about the plight of women or hear about how terrible men are, I'll watch Lifetime.




_________________
Nobody cares what you have in your computer.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vrock on 2002-03-15 07:44 ]</font>

All this by just asking if any women visit TR. Jeez.

On 2002-03-13 13:05, cRock wrote:
Maybe women avoid TR because of stupid threads like this one

amen to that

Blah Blah Blah

Tesserae:

No need to be excessively smug now!

No, what offends ( although this is certainly too strong a word ) me, is not that you are condemning, it is the way you oh-so-conveniently arrogate yourself the moral high ground here.

( Grab the high ground and proceed to piss upon your opponents from a great height, always a good tack, no? )

The fact that you are presenting your case with a high-handed tone is not helping either.

It does not bother me in the slightest that you ( and Polare to a lesser degree, whom you feel compelled to stroke for his agreement with you ) find this behavior puerile. It does however bother me that you use this as a springboard to apparently veil implied insults against the nature of those of us who simply do not share your concern and level-of-umbrage with Taunting.

So, let's cut to the quick, shall we? Do you think it is hypocritical to not be offended or share in your outrage at the practice of taunting but be offended that you are attributing misdemeanors to us for not sharing your view or <gasp> presenting reasons <I>why</I> we do not share your view.

So...as you mentioned you are quite capable of engaging in vulgarity or profanity when you feel the spirit move, as it were. |) I'm sure that when you do so it is acceptable in that particular situation!

In any case, I think you have touched upon the ever-present third-rail of "who-gets-to-be-the-arbiter-of-outrage"...and the simmering discontent of those who take umbrage at others lording such self-righteousness over them.

EDIT: Doh!



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Princess Die on 2002-03-15 17:35 ]</font>

What an interesting thread! If this were a newsgroup instead of TR, I'd expect a "YHBT. YHL. HAND." any minute now...

Mmmm... compelled stroking, hmm? I don't think I should comment on that, but it sure sounds fun! My wife might complain, though

-Polare

EDIT: TwoFer, what the heck is a "YHBT. YHL. HAND." if I may ask?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Polare on 2002-03-15 17:13 ]</font>

Speed opines about the nature of the replies to Tesserae's ( what he may consider 'visionary' ) post about the blight of Taunting on the American Culture:

<I>1 Challenge for acceptable terms
1 Exception to the rule offered
3 Denials that the words mean anything
1 Change of subject
1 "Everybody's doing it"
0 What can I do to help?</I>

I like the really like the last one. But the whole tone is one of "all you hypocrytical, morally stunted, Neandertals just don't get it and don't want to accept that this is a real problem". Sounds like something I heard in a "Womyn's studies" class or a NOW rally.

My previous post can be addressed to your arguments as well, Speed.

As if it is something that 'needs help' in any case. The bottom line is that if you find something ultimately nothing more and nothing less than ( what you think to be ) boorish behavior then you have every right to disassocite yourself from something that you find objectionable. It says nothing about yourself ( or others ) other than they do something that you don't like. It does not however, necessarily confer a postion of moral authority with which to compel others to agree with you.

As far as the charge of evasion ( re: your point#3 ): Tesserae attempted to make the case that Taunting represents <B><I>Genuine</I></B> misogynistic and racist behavior. A case that others vehmently disagree with, myself included. It is not a blanket deconstructionist 'denial that words mean anything', it is a simple statement of fact that <B><I>context, intent, and working definition</I></B> are very important in proving or disproving such a charge.

I for one:

Do I share moral outrage over this? No.

Am I a hypocrite for not doing so? No.

Do I even think this is anything but a triviality? No.

EDIT: My boorish behavior



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Princess Die on 2002-03-15 17:32 ]</font>

Yow! for a triviality I sure am venting my spleen!

BTW: Tesserae, Speed, Polare...If I am offending you personally I apologize, that is not my intent. I am certainly going at your arguments, but I don't mean to drive at you.

Yes, what is: "YHBT. YHL. HAND" ??? I'm totally at a loss.

Polare:

I'm married as well...which explains my jealousy at seeing anybody get stroked!

"YHBT. YHL. HAND." means "You Have Been Trolled. You Have Lost. Have A Nice Day."

Standard old-school newsgroup stuff... a place where I spent a few years (newsgroups, I mean -- not trolling. Well... not much .

Not that I'm certain that Tesserae has actually been trolling -- although if she has, it's a pretty damned good one so far! Having been married to a very strong woman, I recognize the signs in Tesserae -- and if she's who I think she is, she certainly qualifies.

May I suggest that some of the outrage here is simply directed toward a strong woman who speaks her mind? And then doesn't back down when presented with testerone-laden territorial displaying (and I do mean this in the gorilla-at-the-zoo sense, too!)?

In all honesty, I think some folks need to get out more. They might even meet some women (strong ones included, hopefully) and find a bit more balance in their lives... ;^*

On 2002-03-15 07:48, dolemitecomputers wrote:
All this by just asking if any women visit TR. Jeez.

finally, someone who understands

Why try to insult someone you don´t know?
Why be offensive? It doesn´t improve your concentration or aim; and it rarely disrupts your foe either; so why bother being obnoxious?

Why not something inventive, like a Starcraft player i once fought, he wrote the whole damn text of a song while playing; not that it got me off balance, but it sure was fun seeing the texts while he destroyed me =)

Vrock, why not go jump in a lake? I want you to do it, so unless you cant take the heat, DO IT! That´s your own reasoning applied elsewhere, do you see what is wrong?

Offensiveness is the reason some women don´t play in some places, it´s also the reason why many others who don´t really care but prefers players with ability to talk without trying to be offensive.

An example: on a MW2M server which was moderated(slightly) and connected to a leauge that wanted nothing to do with insults, there was at least 7 women regulars;
while at another server, with more total players, and no demands/requests for moderation, there was zero women regulars, there was also a much lousier general attitude. On the first server i had plenty of fun conversations, people was logged on to it no matter if they were going to play, because there was usually so much talking that sometimes even the people coming there to play didn´t have time for it since they got hooked up in discussions. At the other server, the chat area was either rude, offensive, insulting or just not interesting.

My support in this thread to Tesserae, Polare, and Speed.

If you insult people while playing AND in real life, expect pain.

Princess Die, my vote goes to you for official "voice of reason," at least of the last few posts.

One thing I feel compelled to respond to, though: Tesserae's
"I think it is interesting (more than that: fascinating, on a sociological level) that my comments have roused such anger in a few people. I think it no accident that they are precisely those people who are so enamored of "talking smack" to their gaming opponents, and I suggest a significant correlation there. I leave it for you to fill in the blanks - you seem to be good at that - while I content myself with holding up the mirror."

Two things to note:
1. I agree with an earlier comment that the holier-than-thou tone of this and other comments aren't helping the 'anti-smack-talking' camp,' and in fact is something I find offensive. I find this to be widespread in feminist / new leftist / critical race theorist / etc-ist movements, and equally irritating in all such movements, especially when I'm otherwise compelled to support the substantive portion of those movements. It's the implicit (or explicit) name calling, and the back-patting for questioning the status quo without regard to whether it happens to be good at the time, that has irked some of the people posting on this thread.

2. I'm not a gamer, but I find both your earlier comments and your "sociological intrigue" to be offensive. Let me fill in a blank for you: the people angered by your comments tend to be the ones that have advocated / defended "talking smack," that's true. It's because your comments were directed at those people! This borders on obvious to me. OF COURSE you evoked response from the people you were suggesting are mysogenists, insensitive, or insecure. If I were to say "women are inherently computer-illiterate," do you think I would get a sociologically fascinating response from mostly women who claim to be computer-literate? Damn straight I would. This is not a mystery correlation here - you insulted them, they responded.

Additionally, I'm drawing attention to my non-gamer status because DESPITE my not being the target of your comments, I'm offended by your tone and have issues with your arguments. (Since I don't fit your regression, call me an outlier). I, like some of the gamers who have responded, find that overly-vigilant political correctness is a binding, illogical rhetoric that is in fact counterproductive to most of the causes it is used to aid. And yes, I find many of the comments on this thread to fit in that category. One example:

The use of "gals," in my opinion, should be a perfectly legitimate term. It does NOT, in my understanding, pair with "boys" or derive from "girls." It pairs with "guys." As such, your question as to whether I would be offended to be called a "guy" on TR, the answer is no. Furthermore, the comparison to asking "are their any little boys out there" (my emphasis added) is clearly invalid, as the use of "little" is a pivotal and distorts the comparison. It is this sort of being offended at nothing that I find problematic with much of the rest of the argument presented. Instead of being offended at the use of the word "gals," I think a more appropriate response might have been to privately note how wonderful it is that people are aware enough to use "gals" instead of "girls" and take it as a sign of positive change in gender relations.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: technophile on 2002-03-15 19:42 ]</font>

Vrock, I couldn't have written a better satire if I'd tried.

The bottom line is that if you find something ultimately nothing more and nothing less than ( what you think to be ) boorish behavior then you have every right to disassocite yourself from something that you find objectionable. It says nothing about yourself ( or others ) other than they do something that you don't like. It does not however, necessarily confer a postion of moral authority with which to compel others to agree with you.

I'm not compelling you to agree with me; I'm trying to make a point, and get you to understand it. Part of what I'm trying to get you to understand is that what you are describing and defending is more than just "boorish behavior." Whether you accept it is up to you.

Verbal abuse was defended earlier on the grounds that it is common in sports; yet it can get you thrown out of a game, because it is defined as "unsportsmanlike conduct" and is forbidden. That some of it is sneaked past the officials is no defense. The same behavior in a different context is part of hazing, which is now banned at many (if not most) educational institutions, including the national military academies and boot camps.

As far as the charge of evasion ( re: your point#3 ): Tesserae attempted to make the case that Taunting represents Genuine misogynistic and racist behavior. A case that others vehmently disagree with, myself included. It is not a blanket deconstructionist 'denial that words mean anything', it is a simple statement of fact that context, intent, and working definition are very important in proving or disproving such a charge.

I can agree with this as far as it goes, but it doesn't go nearly far enough. Let us continue: part of the context is how the words are received and interpreted. I assume you don't intend to hurt anyone, but how do you know when you have? When they get around to telling you? When you see them flinch and withdraw? Isn't that a bit late?

Let me share a story. I know a man and a woman; she was raped by her father several times a week from the age of six until she ran away from home as a teenager; both she and the man were physically, emotionally and psychologically abused by both parents from the time they were small children. Both have spent years in therapy, and are to outward appearances normal; you might be acquainted with them for years and never suspect what had happened to them as children.

Yet they are both permanently scarred. Placed in a context of verbal abuse, they both will sometimes flash back to their childhood environments, much as a military veteran with combat or POW trauma will flash back to that trauma. This is exquisitely painful for each of them, and they have no real defenses against it - nothing but the consideration of their fellow man.

They are admittedly at one extreme, but most people have a negative response to verbal abuse; the degree varies widely, and can vary widely within an individual depending on their immediate social and mental contexts. The point - the critical point of this entire exercise - is that <i>you have no way of knowing what <b>anyone's</b> response will be, until it is far too late!</i>

Just think how many times you've hurt someone unintentionally, doing something which appears harmless to you; now look at the potential outcome of an activity which is <i>intentionally derisive and deprecatory.</i> Surely this is more than "nothing more and nothing less than ... boorish behavior"!

This is my point, all posturing aside. Speed, Polare, TwoFer and Direwolf75 get it.

<b>gal</b> <i>noun</i>
...
[Alteration of <i>girl.</i>]

<i>Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company.</i>

Let me add again that offense is often taken where it isn't meant, and while complete ignorance can be an excuse (but one time only), disagreement over whether a term is offensive is not an excuse - it's at the very least boorish, once you're aware the term is offensive. You can choose to be a boor, but don't be surprised when you get called on it. And on that point, I'll reiterate that asking if any "gals" are present and then referring to them as "chicks" is not an ideal way of getting a positive response. I pointed this out in all sincerity in my first post.

Aside to TwoFer: I've now guessed who you are - that was just too big a hint. I'm not trolling; well, I admit I may have jiggled the hook a little, once or twice, but this is serious.

You know what, screw it.
I give up. I'm an arrogant, obnoxious prick. I really DONT care what you think of me, so it doesnt matter if I offend you or not. In fact, I might offend you just because I can.

There, is that the kind of confession you were looking for?

Geez.

If I were to stop now and draw some conclusions, I would have to say that there's more to this than just "friendly competition." The content and ferocity of many of the comments indicate to me that this goes far beyond mere game play, and right into our social fabric. So these conclusions would apply not only to the rarefied virtual reality of a FPS game, but to the TR forums and life in general.

- The consensus appears to be that the status quo is paramount over making new friends. Those who don't conform aren't wanted. Whether or not this is simply the difference of the sexes is unclear. IME, clannish behavior tends to discriminate equally well against any differences.

- I'm not a gamer, but my conclusion is that gamers seek to resolve differences through aggression, not compromise. Tesserae's complaint was met with a withering barrage of conflict, and nary a helping hand.

- Misogyny, hatred of women, came up as a point of reference, but IMHO it's a false one. What was at issue was the disrespect towards women, regardless of the motivation. But it did make the "boys" look awfully self-absorbed, caring more about how they are regarded than about how their actions affect others. "Sure I use all those hurtful words! But if I throw in a disclaimer after the fact, I'm absolved, right?" Weasel words don't accomplish much IME.

- Bottom line, my guess is that many see aggression as an end in itself, rather than a means to an end. And we're not even getting to whether or not aggression is the best policy! It may be too harsh to say that gamers "love to hate", but I think there's some kind of infatuation going on.

I'll say again that I'm not here to judge. Everybody's life is their own. But having grown up in an age of amazing progress borne of human cooperation, I am bemused when I see such reactionary ideals. As a society, do we really want to revert to "dog-eat-dog" and go back to shivering alone in caves?

Some have (no doubt correctly) pointed out that Tesserae is not without sin. But does that fact change the validity of her complaint? Aren't most of you really saying "Don't go away mad, just go away."? Wouldn't that have been easier (and more honest) to say in the first place?


_________________
Stick a fork() in it!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Speed on 2002-03-16 00:39 ]</font>

If you are a female and read the first post in this thread, I think a simple "yes" would have answered the guy's question. There's no need for argument here.

(Must...resist...)

Tesserae, the gist of your latest post (and please correct me if I'm reading this incorrectly) seems to be that people should never say (or do, presumably) anything that could potentially offend someone else, since they have no way of knowing what other people would consider offensive.

Is this correct?


Derek Andersen

(Just a quick edit: I'm not a big fan of hurling insults at others (in games or otherwise); I also don't lecture those who decide to do so. There's generally no point to either form of behavior.)


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Derek Andersen on 2002-03-16 00:40 ]</font>

TwoFer:

I didn't know the acronym, but I was definitely thinking that Tesserae was trolling. For my part though, I'm ever willing to bite.

I know plenty of strong women, BTW, civilian and military.

Tesserae:

No, it <I>is</I> boorish behavior. Verbal abuse is boorish behavior as well. The difference is one of degree certainly.

So...now we've gone from LAN gamers saying "I oWN J00, Bitch!" after laying the smack down to Fathers having sex with their Daughters?!? And the linking-thread is <I><B>Talking Smack</B></I>?!? Mary-mother-of-God give me a break!

I submit you intentionally making the water murky here...maybe poisoning the well too.

I don't accept any of the emotional posturing about incest survivors to gain leverage on your crusade against the evils of talking smack.

Speed:

If you aren't a registered Democrat, I'll eat my hat. teehee.

Derek Anderson, you summed up half my post in one question. Cheers to you.

Well, Tesserae, as simplified as question as it may be, is DA's interp incorrect? Especially once sharing stories of child molestation, with the point that you never know what could be offensive / trigger bad memories, how does one possibly draw the line at what is acceptable to say? (In a gaming context or otherwise?) If your contention is that I shouldn't ever say "bitch" because (amongst other things) it brings back traumatic rape-memories, could you not also argue that I should never say "Gotcha!" because someone may have memories of being kidnapped by sex trafficers and when they did, they yelled "Gotcha" as they grabbed him / her?

Should I really restrict my expression (verbal or otherwise) based on obscure possibilities that someone may be reminded of trauma or otherwise offended? I'll answer for you: no, because that's a ridiculous standard.

And I stick to my guy / girl / gal point. Even if I grant you the gal = girl-derivative point,
1. I still contend "gal" pairs with "guy."
2. The comparison to asking "any little boys out there" is still irrelevant
3. Derivatives of words do not always share the exact meaning of the original. "Gal" is a different word from "girl," and to complain about them equivalently is to create a straw man yourself.