- Mood: Pity
- Listening to: ROCKMAN HOLIC - SOUND HOLIC
- Playing: Dragon's Crown
- Eating: Swiss Miss Vanilla Pudding
Just a thought.
And thank you for bringing Dragon's Crown to my attention. If I had a PS3, I think I would go buy it at full price, just on principle.
Robaato is right.
People...fiction and non-fiction are two different things, but when you take the preverbal knife and cut them both into pieces and boil them down, the leftover at the bottom I promise you, would be Imagination.
Whether or not something's real...if it's a piece of art, a game, a figure or just a good idea or concept, or an object or an actual thing....it wasn't real before imagination came into play. To be an artist, is about rendering the unreal into life. Even scientists, must believe unrealistically before they turn it into fact.
Fiction becomes Non-Fiction when it becomes a fact. Fiction is Imagination in motion...
and Imagination is fact under fiction
Internet is full of haters. But sometimes also the reality (which can be worst. On the Internet it's different: you can ignore way easier).
To be quite fair, that entire post was a nitpick about ONE particular aspect of what Robaato said, NOT a complete address to his entire journal. And the statement regarding "fixing" oneself was not even directed at Robaato, it was a general statement. Stop letting your feelings run you.
Plain and simple, words don't cause any more harm than the listener ALLOWS them to. This is why it's so easy to tune someone out once you've discerned something about the verbal attacker that you can easily dismiss. Everyone has this ability to "not give a shit", they simply choose when to express it. I myself am all for "give you flak/receive flak back", but apparently everyone else thinks completely censoring the other party, or telling them to go elsewhere when they dislike something is an okay thing to do. The last I've seen such suppressant mentalities was in Nazi Germany/Pre Civil Rights America. To think that people who would demand their rights be respected, would turn around and then suppress anothers'. There's no better tool than the block button and (in non DA matters) the unjust manipulation of laws for the weak minded and easily offended to make their meaningless feelings count.
Words don't hurt - they "can" hurt (If you let them). In saying that they do hurt, you are trying to pass that statement off as a definite, as if it will always come to pass. I've blasted many people away verbally on this site, and was blocked in some cases, trolled back in some cases, and even befriended or laughed at and with in others. This is very much evidence to the contrary of what you're talking about, and you really didn't even need my experience to come to that conclusion. People are different. They all behave differently. While they are all alike in the avoidance of pain and the pursuit of pleasure, when it comes to COMMUNI-FUCKING-CATION, the message is never always, or even sometimes, interpreted the same way.
All in all, you have the right to get offended, but you don't have the right to impose on another based on your offendedness. You DO have the right to communicate your irritation, and that's good, and healthy, and I would totally applaud that.
So no, you got that backwards. You were wrong. The. Entire. Time.
I was going to respond point by point, but then I realized your other two paragraphs were a bit repetitive. So, I suppose consolidation is the way to go here. So, as an example from personal experience. I'm not supposed to care if someone yells racial slurs at me? 'Cause so far being stripped of your humanity by someone is pretty hard to ignore in and of itself. Let's use another example. Cat calling. After all these ears I keep walking, ignoring what they say, letting roll of my shoulders, but hold on... What's this feeling? Oh, that's right. It's the feeling of being uncomfortable, which is not an emotion, but a state of being. But going back to what I had said in my other post. "Words hurt, sometimes" You see that last part? The word "sometimes"? It's not all inclusive. It denotes that there are exceptions, that this occurrence is not a definite, but that it still occurs. That it is not the be all, end all. You, however, are being all inclusive with your generalization that everyone wants to completely censor people who disagree with that they say/do. And to respond directly to this "The last I've seen such suppressant mentalities was in Nazi Germany/Pre-Civil Rights America. To think that people who would demand their rights be respected, would turn around and then suppress anothers'." I'm sorry, what world or planet have you been living on? This happens on a day to day basis. This is happening possibly right now as I type this response to you.
But, moving on. It's great to see you taking my words out of context or in fact not taking them in their exact context. Not all words spilled forth from someone's mouth or fingertips have a negative connotation or are intended to cause distress. But as you said, people are different and react differently. And despite that, words can and cannot cause someone to be uncomfortable, distressed or summon some kind of negative emotion in them. What offends and bothers one may not offend or bother another. And, you're right everyone perceives differently and that is why people should think about what they want to say before they say it. No one is advocating censorship, but instead critical thought and mature assessment of the situation before something is said. Or perhaps, take the decision to walk away and put distance between them and the person they think and feel is aggressing them.
So no, I did not get it backwards. And an opinion cannot be wrong, simply disagreed with. And finally. The emphasis tends to get lost when you do. Things. Like. This.
But after this, weather you respond or not is inconsequential. The airs you give off and the patronizing tone of your response leave an overwhelmingly terrible and fortunately figurative taste in my mouth. I would prefer that our interaction stop right here.
Ahh, but here's where that thing called interpretation comes in. Once words leave your mouth (spare me the details that this is text), thier message may not be the same as they were in your head. "Actually no" doesn't come off as innocent as "I disagree", but as a blunt dismissal of what I was saying. So "actually no", your statement wasn't as easily interpreted as you may have thought.
And I was using him as an example since it was his journal entry. I thought that was blatantly obvious.
No, it was blatantly stupid, because you talked as if it was very apparent that I was attacking Robaato for what he's saying in this journal. You spoke as if I was DEFINITELY addressing him - i.e. an accusation - not just as an example. Again, your words don't mean the same to you as they do others. Stop with the backpeddling bullshit.
So, as an example from personal experience. I'm not supposed to care if someone yells racial slurs at me? 'Cause so far being stripped of your humanity by someone is pretty hard to ignore in and of itself.
Right, you shouldn't give a shit if someone yells racial slurs at you. Why? What the fuck does that person mean to you?
Are they someone you know?
Someone you care about?
Or just some random person who happens to share the same classroom, zipcode or location as you?
If they're someone you care about, the next course of action is to figure out WHY they called you a racial slur, and regardless of whatever the action is, the only DECENT next step emotionally is to feel disappointment. NOT sadness, NOT self loathing or hatred or whatever bullshit. Those are examples of UNCHECKED EMOTIONS that are NOT equivalent in balance to the situation. What was uttered was a word. Just a word. Strip all of the unnecessary shit like the history, and culture surrounding the word, and you get.... just a word. Something given a sequentially lettered designation in order to be readily identified, and nothing more. If not, then would you feel the same self loathing, sadness and hatred for someone who called you a pig, or a chicken shit? Both are "stripping you of your humanity", albeit in a different way, but to the same effect logically.
Ha, this is why I don't believe in such things as maturity, because human beings well over the age of 21 still can't seem to find calling someone the word NIGGER as effective as calling someone a "Poopy head". And then there's the fact that you mentioned that such words strip you of your humanity. Overdramatic, much? Next time someone calls you a racial slur, and you find yourself doubting your humanity, do yourself a favor and run a self diagnostic - "Can I still think? Check. All 5 senses intact? Check. Do I still appear humanoid? Check. Conclusion? Something's wrong with me for ever doubting."
But you're wrong in assuming my emotions "run me" as you said (Or that I'm letting them "run me"). And that is a very terrible assumption to make considering you don't even know me.
First you sound as if accusing me of dismissing Robaato's entire message, then you go on to tell me how much a single racial slur can usurp you of your humanity. Yep, I don't need to know you, I know enough to know your feelings have YOU in check.
What's this feeling? Oh, that's right. It's the feeling of being uncomfortable, which is not an emotion, but a state of being.
Yeah, attempting to pass your emotions off as something more than they are, yet again. What with the negative stigmas upon sexual intercourse, coupled with natural defenses such as familiarity with the person in question who is catcalling, along with the nature of the type of person who initiates the calling, it's no wonder that you FEEL, not "get put in the state of being", uneasy. This entire scenario is pretty much OUTSIDE the realm of anything I was talking about anyway, as statements that are obviously threatening goes beyond the type of exchange that I'm describing. The fact that someone calls you a nigger is easily dissmissable. You being the only black person around, in a place where there's a bunch of white guys calling you a nigger is a completely different thing altogether. My stance states they should be allowed to call you a nigger. The alternative is to not allow them to call you a nigger. In MY scenario, you at least get a fucking WARNING before these guys ever come to do anything more than just call you a racial slur. How does that sound to you, or would you prefer they keep quiet about their future actions instead?
"The last I've seen such suppressant mentalities was in Nazi Germany/Pre-Civil Rights America. To think that people who would demand their rights be respected, would turn around and then suppress anothers'." I'm sorry, what world or planet have you been living on? This happens on a day to day basis. This is happening possibly right now as I type this response to you.
You totally whooshed the point where I'm likening the people of today, who should know fucking better, to people of history, in an obviously instantly recognizable example.
And, you're right everyone perceives differently and that is why people should think about what they want to say before they say it.
I agree that much... But only in the case that they are trying to get their message out the way they want to, not to spare anyone's feelings. If they deserve a verbal thrashing then they deserve one. If you dislike something about a person, you express it in a way that is accurate at voicing your discontent. If it offends the person in question, good, because it shows just how much you hated it. It's PERFECT that way. I can't disagree enough with the idea that everyone should be pushed upon some sort of self thought-filtering honor system just to spare someone else the chance to discipline their emotional outbursts at communication. The only way you're going to get used to verbal abuse is to be subjected to it.
And an opinion cannot be wrong, simply disagreed with.
Lol. An opinion can be wrong. Very wrong. In my opinion, all prudes creating laws to restrict obscenity should be wiped off the planet in the most painfully brutal way possible. Tell me that opinion isn't wrong. They're still human, and can be shown the error of their ways. That opinion is nothing more than a quick fix that wouldn't necessarily work even if it did follow through. It's WRONG. Period.
And your final paragraph...
I would say sorry, having jumped quickly to battle mode at the mere sight of the words "actually no", but I won't. I'm blunt and combatant for a reason - to frighten off prudes (or easily offended sensitive people) because I absolutely hate weak minded folk who want to slow down the progress of others just so that they can feel comfortable. You appear to be that type of person, and so long as you feel the need to RUN AWAY from a conversation, I feel comfortable having been rid of you.
Now that you've readied the righteous mob, whose car should we go flip? I'm down for two, three car flippings easy.