Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Naturegirl1999]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

[Kagus]

Well... I mean... "Calamari" isn't French, and all that interesting and poignant backstory cropped up after they were already called Mon Calamari/Calamarians. As with a lot of Star Wars lore. Lucas wasn't even the one to come up with the name.


Also, nobody cares about the Quarren. Quarranon?

[Frumple]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

Long pork would probably be the equivalent, and it's something we call ourselves fairly often.

Probably would be fairly threatening, but on the other hand, most things in history that particularly able to back up that sort of threat we've eventually either domesticated or ate, so...

[Starver]

"To Serve Man"

[scriver]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

Not if the word "beef" isn't the word "beef".

There's no reason Calamari in the Star Wars universe is the name of a Italian/Romance octopus dish. They probably just thought it was a funny and/or good-sounding name for the species.

[TamerVirus]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

The proper term is meatbag

[Random_Dragon]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

I for one would be flattered to have been upgraded from Long Pork to Tall Beef.

[nenjin]

If you found out another species called humans something like meatsacks or beef, wouldn’t you consider that derogatory and/or threatening?

Not if the word "beef" isn't the word "beef".

There's no reason Calamari in the Star Wars universe is the name of a Italian/Romance octopus dish. They probably just thought it was a funny and/or good-sounding name for the species.

The rest sounds like Star Wars Extended Universe revisionist nonsense.

[Random_Dragon]

The rest sounds like Star Wars Extended Universe revisionist nonsense.

Something something weird arguments over how fucked the moon of Endor is or isn't.

[MrRoboto75]

The rest sounds like Star Wars Extended Universe revisionist nonsense.

Something something weird arguments over how fucked the moon of Endor is or isn't.

It's not like chewbacca lives there or anything.

[Rolan7]

Relevant XKCD about names referencing Earth animals in a galaxy far away, a long time ago: https://xkcd.com/890/

And I wouldn't say we call humans "long pork".  Humans contain long pork, in a certain taboo context.  "Meatsack" really is the better example but it's all inherently disrespectful.  It'd be like calling a dog Dogmeat, or a lamb Lamb Chop, or a pig Porky... hm.

Unimportant storylet I liked:  A race of one-eyed beings in Schlock Mercenary live on a world they call Oth, but humans call them "uniocs".  One of the human characters asks their unioc friend about this, and the explanation is "It's better than being called Others."

Later there's a misunderstanding over whether a habitat is Earth-like or Oth-like.

[feelotraveller]

I don't like the recent movements of media to forcibly cut off stupid or dangerous viewpoints as a default action. I'd rather we live in a world where we can simply say "haha that's dumb" and just move on.  However, I realize we're in a world that doesn't have the ability to discern wise from unwise any more - so perhaps it is better that, for a time, we do as much as we can to put the unwise out of easy reach.  Same way you put dangerous chemicals out of reach of children - when they are older they can use it.

I think the classic example of free speech having limits, at least moral and likely legal depending on location, is that it is generally agreed that you are not at liberty to shout "Fire!" in a crowded cinema (debatable if there really is a fire...).  To bring two relevant crtieria out of this, the 'right' to free speech fails when it brings others into harm, and secondly, it is not defensible when in contradiction to facts/reality.  Yes there is some grey around 'harm', a minor slight to an individual's feelings most likely fails the test whereas imminent life-threatening danger to a group does not.  And 'facts' 'reallity' are debatable. The major problem caused by the alt-right is that they have majorly lost contact with what can be said (credibly) to be real or not.  Given that this voice has, for a couple of decades, had extensive air-time amongst but not restricted to the major media it is unsurprising that a section of the population has lost the ability to discern reality.

[nenjin]

The Right is committing borderline fraud, even if their victims are too deluded to realize it.

And as an example of free speech run amok, some county clerk in Colorado just gave some rando the passwords to the voting machines in her county, and posted them up online. Currently attending Pillow Jackass’s cyber symposium. The Right’s blatant lies are resulting in criminal behavior, and if it keeps going, it’s going to morph into violence. That is most certainly not protected speech.

[Naturegirl1999]

*deep inhale, followed by very loud scream* Why have facts and reality fallen into gray? How could we let this happen??!!

[Frumple]

The Right is committing borderline fraud, even if their victims are too deluded to realize it.

I mean, it's not borderline. You occasionally see actual lawsuits go through, there's just so much grifter shit out there it's basically background noise.