Print

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

[Akura]

Oh hey, I wonder if the same person who visited Eric's store came to mine.


Also, why, after he cleaned up the mess in our men's room, did the manager deposit the trash bag(which looked like it had a lot in it) that he brought back into the break room garbage can?
I'm assuming it's because everyone else refused to clean the men's room.

[Neonivek]

I am seriously not understanding the victim/victimizer dichotomy.

I don't know why it is so important to push it...

But ONLY guess is that the reason it is pushed so much is that... It is an inherently prejudiced system that recognizes its own prejudice, and so it must dehumanize the victimizer while also removing the victim from the situation. That is why any attempt to empower the victim or humanize the victimizer is met with hostility.

...okay, so two people are dating.  One of them tries to run it like a normal relationship, the other one is abusive AF.  You don't see any dichotomy there?

The Victim/Victimizer Dichotomy is more... Two people are dating, both of them are perfectly normal people...

But one of them is the victim and the other is the victimizer. Thus everything victimizes the victim, and everything makes the victimizer more pronounced.

The exact things the victimizer does isn't important, the victimizer does it simply by being a victimizer. It also doesn't matter what the victim does they are always the victim and can never escape the shadow that is their victimhood.

[overseer05-15]

I am seriously not understanding the victim/victimizer dichotomy.

I don't know why it is so important to push it...

But ONLY guess is that the reason it is pushed so much is that... It is an inherently prejudiced system that recognizes its own prejudice, and so it must dehumanize the victimizer while also removing the victim from the situation. That is why any attempt to empower the victim or humanize the victimizer is met with hostility.

...okay, so two people are dating.  One of them tries to run it like a normal relationship, the other one is abusive AF.  You don't see any dichotomy there?

The Victim/Victimizer Dichotomy is more... Two people are dating, both of them are perfectly normal people...

But one of them is the victim and the other is the victimizer. Thus everything victimizes the victim, and everything makes the victimizer more pronounced.

The exact things the victimizer does isn't important, the victimizer does it simply by being a victimizer. It also doesn't matter what the victim does they are always the victim and can never escape the shadow that is their victimhood.

Are you.. Trying to say that one is a victim and the other is not simply because they're dating?

[TheBiggerFish]

I am seriously not understanding the victim/victimizer dichotomy.

I don't know why it is so important to push it...

But ONLY guess is that the reason it is pushed so much is that... It is an inherently prejudiced system that recognizes its own prejudice, and so it must dehumanize the victimizer while also removing the victim from the situation. That is why any attempt to empower the victim or humanize the victimizer is met with hostility.

...okay, so two people are dating.  One of them tries to run it like a normal relationship, the other one is abusive AF.  You don't see any dichotomy there?

The Victim/Victimizer Dichotomy is more... Two people are dating, both of them are perfectly normal people...

But one of them is the victim and the other is the victimizer. Thus everything victimizes the victim, and everything makes the victimizer more pronounced.

The exact things the victimizer does isn't important, the victimizer does it simply by being a victimizer. It also doesn't matter what the victim does they are always the victim and can never escape the shadow that is their victimhood.

Are you.. Trying to say that one is a victim and the other is not simply because they're dating?

I don't think that's what he means?

It's like, to go to extremes:
"Oh, you're dating a man?  Oh you poor girl, here, let me -"
"I don't want your help, we're perfectly fine-"
"He's a man!"

Something like that.

[JoshuaFH]

I'm so confused.

[TheBiggerFish]

I'm so confused.

Me too.

[Neonivek]

I'm so confused.

Me too.

Sorry I was too tired to post again and didn't know how to do it metaphorically.

Lets go back to couples but lets increase the number of couples... I'll do it in steps

-There are 100 couples. Each Couple consists of one Apple and one Banana (I was originally going to say, A and B)
-Of these 100 couples, they find out that one of these couples has an abusive relationship. One Banana is an abusive Fruit.
-They try to find a possible reason for this abuse and conclude that it is because it is a Banana.
-They look for more abuse
-Two other couples are found out to have abusive Bananas. Indeed not only are Bananas to blame, but Apples are their victim.
-They conclude that it is a Banana's Banananess that makes them abuse Apples.
-They look for more abuse but they cannot find any.
-They conclude that Bananas must be abusing Apples in more subtle and hidden ways. Apples are considered passive victims.
-It is discovered that one couple is also abusive, the Apple is the abusive partner. Yet apples are victims, it must be the Banana's fault it happened.
-Apples have different opinions on cause of abuse.
-They conclude that Apples who do not believe that Bananas are abusive are victims of abuse who cannot think for themselves.
-Bananas speak out against their character being besmirched.
-They conclude that Bananas are only trying to maneuver themselves in order to be more abusive.

I hope this gives a sort of... really GENERAL idea... the Victim/Victimizer Dictonomy is more for groups than individuals. As it deals less with tangible things you can point to in people.

[IcyTea31]

So we get scenarios like these:

Banana: "Hey, where can I get help? My Apple tried to strangle me last night."
Apple: "Clearly, it was you who forced them to do that, you filthy abuser!"
Banana: "What, no! I love my Apple!"
Apple: "Ha! Now you're just trying to deny it!"

Apple 1: "So, how did your Banana abuse you today?"
Apple 2: "Abuse? No, we're completely happy together!"
Apple 1: "Ah, they must abuse you so hard you can't even admit it!"

Researcher 1: "That new Apple-Apple couple turned out to be abusive. What caused this?"
Researcher 2: "I got it! The abusive Apple had previously dated a Banana! It's all the Banana's fault!"
Researcher 1: "You sure? From what I understand, they broke up on good terms."
Researcher 2: "Absolutely! Apples are always victims!"

Scenarios like these happen in real life, but luckily real life isn't an apples-bananas caricature where these things happen all the time. Too bad people exist who would like it to be so. And that's all I have to say about that.

[Neonivek]

It isn't even good for the Apples. It is easy to look at the Bananas but being an Eternal Victim isn't good either.

Apple 1: "I want to get into sports, I work hard and I love it!"
Apple 2: "Too bad the Bananas are there. They won't give you a chance and will abuse you first chance you get"
Apple 1: "So I guess I won't get into Sports.. I don't want to be abused"
Apple 2: "Shame these Bananas keep good apples from Sports"

Apple 1: "I've cured Cancer! I am the greatest medical mind the world has ever known!"
Apple 2: "Congratulations you managed to overcome the weakness of being an apple"
Apple 1: "Well, no I am just really smart and had the money for education"
Apple 2: "And so well spoken too! People will remember you as the Apple that overcame Bananas"
Apple 1: "But what about my medical discoveries?"
Apple 2: "Those aren't important, what is important is how you were a victim of Bananas"

Apple 2: "You are *Positive Trait* Apple 2, even though people keep telling you that you are *Negative Trait*"
Apple 1: "Wait people are calling me *Negative Trait*? I haven't heard that"
Apple 2: "Yes all Bananas think your *Negative Trait* and tell you this constantly. But you are *Positive Trait*"

Everything a Banana is, is as a Victimizer or "As an exception" of being a victimizer. Everything a Apple does in as a victim or "In spite" of being a victim.

[Mathel]

So, Dungeons and Dragons. Normal units move 30ft per round without sprinting, 60ft per round with sprinting. I did some calculations, and 30ft/6s is 9,14m/6s, which is 1,5m/s (3m/s when sprinting)

This puts them at 5,5 km/h when not sprinting and 11km/h when sprinting.
That is very slow for a running human. (and humans in D&D also have such speeds) I would expect them to at least jog when in combat, but they seem to be just walking.
As for sprinting, I would expect them to go about 20km/h.

So, it seems that most d&d characters are slow.

[EnigmaticHat]

None of this has made me less confused.

[Yoink]

But why the fuck does this shit happen here? I dont work at fucking walmart jesus god

I feel like I'd do well in such a job.
My life is shit, and I find myself picking up the pieces of that all the time. Heck, I don't even get to wear gloves!
Perhaps I should apply for a janitorial role.    

[Neonivek]

None of this has made me less confused.

I'll have to think harder for a better metaphor...

Think about how the Nazis claimed the Jews were attacking them and their way of life... and even when the Nazis started the holocaust, I am sure they still believed they were the victims.

If that doesn't help (actually it shouldn't... that is Victim Complex... Not Victim/Victimizer Dichotomy)... Yeah I'll keep thinking and present one that I think is sufficient to demonstrate or get the idea of the Victim/Victimizer Dichotomy across.

[Rolan7]

So, Dungeons and Dragons. Normal units move 30ft per round without sprinting, 60ft per round with sprinting. I did some calculations, and 30ft/6s is 9,14m/6s, which is 1,5m/s (3m/s when sprinting)

This puts them at 5,5 km/h when not sprinting and 11km/h when sprinting.
That is very slow for a running human. (and humans in D&D also have such speeds) I would expect them to at least jog when in combat, but they seem to be just walking.
As for sprinting, I would expect them to go about 20km/h.

So, it seems that most d&d characters are slow.

Ouch... I'm going to assume this is 5th edition, since it seems to match your information (the 60ft/r being "dashing", 2*30ft/r).  ~7mph...  Yeah, not great for a sprinting adventurer on smooth terrain, unencumbered.

3.5e's rules for movement are a bit more accurate/complicated (not looking to hate on 5e, just trying to learn all the changes for an upcoming campaign).
Normal combat movement while taking actions is the same, 30ft/r ~3.4 MPH for base humans.
Or you can run at 4x that speed, or 3x in heavy armor.  Most characters can handle this for a minute, maybe two, before getting fatigued.  There's a potentially decent feat that bumps that to 5x/4x.
Fatigued characters can't run, but they can still focus on "hustling" by not taking standard actions.  Essentially moving twice, so 60ft/r ~7MPH for a base human.

There's also a nice table for movement over various periods of time (:
But yeah that's weird in 5th edition, unless there's something I don't see yet (I am up very late).  Ah well, streamlining can be good.

[IcyTea31]

So, Dungeons and Dragons. Normal units move 30ft per round without sprinting, 60ft per round with sprinting. I did some calculations, and 30ft/6s is 9,14m/6s, which is 1,5m/s (3m/s when sprinting)

This puts them at 5,5 km/h when not sprinting and 11km/h when sprinting.
That is very slow for a running human. (and humans in D&D also have such speeds) I would expect them to at least jog when in combat, but they seem to be just walking.
As for sprinting, I would expect them to go about 20km/h.

So, it seems that most d&d characters are slow.

Meanwhile, in a campaign I'm playing in, my 8th-level monk character with a specific feat to increase speed can sprint (using base movement, action and bonus action) at 165 ft./6s = 8,3875 m/s = 30,195 km/h for a total of 48 seconds, after which he must either slow down to 20,13 km/h or start using magic. These numbers are believable for someone at the peak of human(oid) ability. I'm guessing other characters are so slow in order to make the class specializing in mobility quicker than them without being unrealistically fast. You could also argue that the slowness comes from it being a combat pace where you're focusing on things other than running, i.e. fighting.

Edit: out of combat, a party can hike over simple terrain such as road or plains at 300 ft./min, 3 mi/h and 24 mi/d at "normal" pace regardless of its characters' combat speeds, though for many characters it would be the same. 24 miles to a day is very impressive, so apparently most characters in D&D are expert hikers but completely worthless on the track.

Edit #2: it should also be noted that a character with the "average" strength of 10 can do all this while carrying 50 pounds of gear without being encumbered by it. If the encumbrance variant rule isn't used, you can raise that to 150 pounds. Even if it's perfectly distributed over the body, that's still a heavy burden.