Last edited by mickygor; 01-05-2012 at 03:07 PM. Reason: multiquote
mickygor, Battlefield 3
Otmer, League of Legends EUW
Bastiat, Planetside 2, Miller NC
How is this a debate? Saying rude things is a waste of everyone's time. So don't say things that are considered to be rude.
And don't whine too much one way or the other, it's just irritating.
Irrelevant on further examination of the rest of the thread.
No, I'm sorry. We all have a reasonable idea of what is and what is not rude.
I didn't say "don't say things that someone somewhere might consider rude." Coz fuck them.
RPS Arma 2 community server!
Join us for tacticlol manshootery, explosions and helicopter crashes.
In that light I would be particularly interested to hear about casual use of 'rape' amongst women and how it compares to, say, the male-dominated online gaming contexts with which we are all familiar.
According to Etymonline the two meanings both date from roughly the 14th century. And of course if one considers the place of women in society back then, the difference between the two was perhaps not as significant as we might consider it today, i.e. one was a fairly simple derivation from the other.The context in which a term is used is clearly important. The malicious interpersonal act termed 'rape' has a different context than rape of the land [....] Clearly the use hasn't diminished its use in other contexts.
Indeed I suspect that the power we attach today to the word 'rape' used in contexts-other-than-sexual-violation does indeed derive directly from that primary context in which we use it. They cannot be separated, and there is no reason to think that the influence is other than omnidirectional, i.e. casual use of the term diminishing its significance in all contexts.
Last edited by Rii; 02-05-2012 at 01:49 AM.
That's true because we're describing something a serious violation, and you're right that land and women were seen as a kind of property back when the term was in use, but there's a big difference between rape of a person and rape of a land. A person has (or is supposed to have) free well and self-determination, the right to refuse, to resist. The land cannot. It has no feelings. It's not sapient/sentient and doesn't have traumatic flashbacks or anything like that. But people have no problems differentiating between the two contexts; the fact that rape of a land is different from rape of a person doesn't diminish the impact it has on a person and recognition of it by others.
Again I don't agree with its overuse but I'm not seeing any evidence that it's diminishing the impact of the word in cases of crime. If anything the concept of rape and its illegality is increasing in recent years, to the point where the very issue of consent is becoming nebulous.