Print

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

[Nadaka]

Do you even understand what the word "trivialize" means?

And do you not see how utterly ridiculous and contemptible the post you just made is?

[MonkeyHead]

Andir, you cant ignore the fact that language evolves over time so words have more of an association to different meanings, losing thier original intended one to most people. "Gay" would be another good example of a word whose usage has changed signifigantly over time which now has little relevance in the eyes of many to its original use.

[Andir]

Do you even understand what the word "trivialize" means?

Yeah, I do.  There's a definition for a word.  Someone uses it to mean something else and they trivialize the true meaning for their own gain.

And do you not see how utterly ridiculous and contemptible the post you just made is?

If I did, would I be writing it?  Nice ad hominem BTW.

Andir, you cant ignore the fact that language evolves over time so words have more of an association to different meanings, losing thier original intended one to most people. "Gay" would be another good example of a word whose usage has changed signifigantly over time which now has little relevance in the eyes of many to its original use.

But that doesn't mean that if I say: "I had a gay time" that someone should call me out and tell me to stop using it in that sense.

[MonkeyHead]

I agree - but that wasnt my point. However, in the modern world, most people wouldnt assume that your usage of the word meant that you had just been on a wonderful picnic in the 1950's... there are words that are much better to use that would convey your intentions in a much clearer way.

[Andir]

I agree - but that wasnt my point. However, in the modern world, most people wouldnt assume that your usage of the word meant that you had just been on a wonderful picnic in the 1950's...

and most people wouldn't assume that I meant that a union was sexually attacking a company in my above usage either.  I can't even begin to see how that would work.

I suppose why we are talking common wordplay, I could point out the multitude of "End Women's Suffrage" skits where people interpret suffrage to mean suffering?  Can we just redefine all words to the "common" interpretation?

[scriver]

All right, I agree with Willfor and Frumple. Please behave like sensible people and stop this discussion now.

[kaijyuu]

Political correctness again? We love this topic.


My normal stance applies here too (speaker should pay attention to context and audience to avoid miscommunication, ignoring speaker intent when known is contemptible on the part of the listener, etc). However, I will concede for words like "rape" that PTSD can play a part. Normally I have no sympathy for people who get offended when they know the speaker intended a word in a non-offensive manner, but those suffering from PTSD from traumatic experiences (like, you know, rape) can't always really control that. Thus it is the one case I'll accept getting upset over words themselves rather than what they're meant to represent.


So, I have no personal issue with a gamer saying they "raped" someone in starcraft 2 last night. I will, however, be on the side of someone who says "please don't use that word," assuming they've experienced something traumatic relating to the word's other meaning.

[Nadaka]

Do you even understand what the word "trivialize" means?

Yeah, I do.  There's a definition for a word.  Someone uses it to mean something else and they trivialize the true meaning for their own gain.

And do you not see how utterly ridiculous and contemptible the post you just made is?

If I did, would I be writing it?  Nice ad hominem BTW.

Andir, you cant ignore the fact that language evolves over time so words have more of an association to different meanings, losing thier original intended one to most people. "Gay" would be another good example of a word whose usage has changed signifigantly over time which now has little relevance in the eyes of many to its original use.

But that doesn't mean that if I say: "I had a gay time" that someone should call me out and tell me to stop using it in that sense.

Attacking the vile shit spewing out of your posts is not an ad homonym attack. You are quite literally making utterly ridiculous and contemptible statements. Period.

So how do we refer to Rape of Nanking now?

That event was sufficiently violent and horrible that I don't think the use of the term is a problem at all, especially considering the fact that actual rape was involved.

The problem with using "rape" to refer to things like economics, or as a political tool, or casually ("I got totally raped in that game last night") is not only that it serves as a potential trigger or might be offensive. It's also that it trivializes a very serious and very traumatic thing, and this is not what western society needs. Western society trivializes rape itself enough. It doesn't need any help.

But isn't the sexual attack term derived form the original term?  So... in essence, calling a sexual attack "rape" is trivializing the original meaning of the word: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rape

[kaenneth]

It can be hard to imagine how trigger words work if you haven't experienced it yourself.

I used to be on a medication called Methotrexate which was often abbreviated "MTX"

That medication caused terrible nausea, feeling like I was going to throw up 24/7, but never actually doing so. Eventually I realized I didn't have to take that medication, I could just choose to be in pain the rest of my life.

To this day, I can't drive down a nearby street without feeling sick because a car stereo place has a huge sign for MTX brand car audio stuff. I also can't think of cranberries, because the doctor had me mix the Methotrexate with it. It's all very "Clockwork Orange"

Now I feel like throwing up because of typing all this =P

Ironically, I see people eventually complaining that the phrase "Trigger words" triggers what they are afraid is in them... just like I keep thinking of cranberry juice (and getting slightly ill) as the reason I skip the juice isle in the store...

[Max White]

Hmm, this raises an interesting topic...
Does this mean it would be incorrect to use the term "The army molested the fortress gates" because it might invoke a negative reaction because of somebodies personal history?

Not taking sides quiet yet, just looking for opinions.

[MonkeyHead]

I dont understand why the word molested would be used ahead of some other synonym like "harried".

Can we really get off semantics now please?

[G-Flex]

So how do we refer to Rape of Nanking now?

That event was sufficiently violent and horrible that I don't think the use of the term is a problem at all, especially considering the fact that actual rape was involved.

The problem with using "rape" to refer to things like economics, or as a political tool, or casually ("I got totally raped in that game last night") is not only that it serves as a potential trigger or might be offensive. It's also that it trivializes a very serious and very traumatic thing, and this is not what western society needs. Western society trivializes rape itself enough. It doesn't need any help.

But isn't the sexual attack term derived form the original term?  So... in essence, calling a sexual attack "rape" is trivializing the original meaning of the word: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rape

You're kidding, right? The centuries-old etymology of a word isn't very relevant. What matters is what it means right now, your own link shows that it has referred to sexual violation since the Renaissance or so, it still means that today, and colloquial usages of the word stem directly from that meaning.

I've known multiple people who have been victims of sexual assault. In fact, statistically speaking, you probably do too. I can tell you from experience in dealing with them that, yes, using the word "rape" in an inappropriate context can be upsetting.

Also: Yes, subverting a word (and therefore a concept) to use it in trivial contexts does trivialize that context. When you take a word that refers to something incredibly traumatizing and use it in a metaphorical sense to refer to, say, getting beaten in a video game, or being told to pay for something by the government, that trivializes the concept. When people use "rape" in that sense, it's not in some extremely convoluted or historical sense that just happens to coincidentally be connected to a word that refers to sexual assault; it's used that way because it refers to sexual assault, because it makes referring to something as "rape" an extremely cheap and easy way to sensationalize something. It's a dysphemism, or something like it; it's using an extremely harsh word/concept to exaggerate a more trivial one by metaphorically equating the two. In the case of something as common, traumatic, and commonly trivialized as sexual assault, yes, this is trivializing something that shouldn't be trivialized. Rape is a very serious and socially relevant subject, is a very common thing for people to have gone through, and should not be used to metaphorically refer to casual events or as a cheap political tool to mess with people's emotions about a subject.

And no, nobody thinks the person would actually be referring to sexual assault; that isn't the point. The point is that it's extremely offensive and potentially triggering to sexual assault victims to refer to things as "rape" that aren't, and that the concept shouldn't be taken that lightly or trivialized in such a manner.

[Andir]

I dont understand why the word molested would be used ahead of some other synonym like "harried".

Well, if I read the thread right... nobody uses the word "harried" (at least, I can't think of a point in time when I've ever heard it besides right now) so it's therefore not common usage and would be frowned upon because the common usage is unknown.

[MonkeyHead]

Im not going to make any kind of retort/response/argument to that at all, even though I really want to. I really want to get off this stupid series of circular arguments about semantics in the english language. Please.

Possible ideas:

Media corruption in the UK seems to go very deep

Will Israel take a first strike option against Iran?

More shenanigans regarding Falklands/Malvinas

This is a desperate plea for some meaningful discourse on here please, about anything other than words and thier meanings.

[kaijyuu]

Hmm, this raises an interesting topic...
Does this mean it would be incorrect to use the term "The army molested the fortress gates" because it might invoke a negative reaction because of somebodies personal history?

Not taking sides quiet yet, just looking for opinions.

Depends how concerned you are about the possibility of such a reaction. Assuming you don't know your audience at all before saying it, it's possible and not extremely unlikely, but still unlikely.

'Course if you know someone listening would have a negative reaction like that beforehand, there's no question: avoid using the word.



New topic:
Drug war advocate politician arrested for drug trafficking.

Throughout his political career, Gandara has taken a hard-line anti-drug stance. In September, he told the El Paso Times he thought drug legalization was a bad idea for the country.

Who benefits from the drug war, again? Oh yeah; drug traffickers and cartels.