The Official Woody Woodpecker Thread
-
Everyone is taking shit to extreme levels on both sides and yelling at each others across the fence.
Standard WTDWTF debate then.
-
You don't get to teach people about what makes them "easily traumatized".
All exaggeration and anger aside, I'm not doubting that some people might be traumatized by that experience and I didn't mean to ridicule those people. So I'm sorry for having made potentially hurtful comments while in an angry mood.
But you said…
It might not be rape by textbook definition
…which implies that you equate it with rape anyway. And I'm telling you that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. I shouldn't ridicule people who would be traumatized something that wouldn't traumatize me, you shouldn't claim that something "is like rape".
And now, this half-apology is actually going to be my last post in this thread and on this topic on this forum, ever.
-
You're not protected by law from being traumatized. If there was no violence or the threat of violence its not comparable to rape. And if you only detected somethings was wrong after the fact, then the experience was positive and you got this trauma later because of your own mental disorders.
-
So you're arguing that deception in an intimate relationship is not a reason to be pissed off.
No, I'm arguing that failure to disclose trans status when not asked about it should not count as deception to any reasonable person, any more than would failure to disclose a hairy back or prosthetic breast or awful dental caries.
There are any number of things one could find out about a prospective sex partner that could cause an initial attraction to vanish instantly because ewwww. Obviously any of those could be quite legitimate grounds for disappointment. The only one I have ever seen held up as legitimate grounds for fury is possession of unexpected genitalia. I have yet to see a reasoned argument in support of treating this as a special case. The Thread That Cannot Be Named contains many fallacious arguments that attempt to rationalize treating it so.
-
Standard WTDWTF debate then.
Well, yeah, but with the difference that there's almost no hard data to present and it's all "I feel this" and "I feel that".
-
I shouldn't ridicule people who would be traumatized something that wouldn't traumatize me, you shouldn't claim that something "is like rape".
It might not be rape, but it doesn't mean it can't be like rape when it comes to how someone feels about it. No, the law doesn't recognize it as the same, but it doesn't mean a person isn't allowed to feel as if they've been raped.
And if you only detected somethings was wrong after the fact, then the experience was positive and you got this trauma later because of your own mental disorders.
Okay, so let's say you get into a bed with a girl, and she blindfolds you and starts blowing you. Except after the fact you take the blindfold off, and it turns out it's her brother who did the deed.
I guess according to you, since "the experience was positive", you actually liked it and any problem you have with that is the result of a fucking mental disorder?
-
Well, yeah, but with the difference that there's almost no hard data to present and it's all "I feel this" and "I feel that".
I don't have a problem with that.
I have a problem with people who try to mandate that "you are not allowed, or supposed to feel that".
-
if there's one thing I cannot stand, it's people who broaden the definition of rape
I enjoy needling such people until they become enraged. Makes me feel all warm and glowy.
-
They just need to toughen up, I think is what you're trying to say.
-
I don't have a problem with that.
I have a problem with people who try to mandate that "you are not allowed, or supposed to feel that".
And I don't want to get dragged into that kind of discussion here. The way this forum works, and I'm talking both about us regular users and mods, is a poor place for that kind of discussion, IMHO. But again, I'm fine with anyone interested engaging in it.
I pretty much just followed this topic hoping I'll get cliffsnotes of the whole discussion, which I did, and to politely ask people who keep dragging it into every thread to stop it, which I hope came across above.
Note: The above was not directed at Maciej specifically, his post was just complementary to what I wanted to say.
-
to feel as if they've been raped
Last comment ever, because apparently a clarification is needed: Many people who have no idea what being raped actually feels like and how severely it will scar you emotionally claim they "feel as if they've been raped". That's my problem, I'm not disallowing anyone to feel anything. I'm also not claiming that it's impossible to trigger the same strong emotions in a different way, but the claim
to feel as if they've been raped
is made way too often by way too many people. I find that scary and infuriating, especially if those people then attempt to broaden the definition of rape, when most of them have no basis to even make an educated guess whether something is like rape or not. In general, changing definitions to fit your own political agenda/uneducated personal opinion is a very bad thing to do.
-
I'm just doubting that would cause serious trauma in most people.
I'm doubting it would cause trauma in anybody who has not decided as a matter of policy that it is vital that nobody might ever think of them as anything but exclusively heterosexual.
Such a policy is rooted in fear and ignorance, and serves both to de-normalize non-heterosexuality and expose those who follow it to a completely unnecessary risk of trauma; I see it as useless, contemptible and (critically) optional, making it legitimate cause for mockery.
-
You don't get to tell people that their experiences and feelings are not a big deal, and that they should just man up and get over it, just because you can.
Since that's been the exact line of argument consistently run by @Fox in TTTCBN, it appears we have reached common ground. Must be barbecue time.
-
-
Did it not occur to you that it was done purposefully to try and inject some lightheartedness into the discussion by creating an opening for a
joke? Honestly, sir, your lack of faith in me is hurtful!The original version was something about avoiding hot dogs, but I concluded that the current version has a better
:giggity:potential quotient
-
I guess according to you, since "the experience was positive", you actually liked it and any problem you have with that is the result of a fucking mental disorder?
trauma != "a problem"
-
Many people who have no idea what being raped actually feels like and how severely it will scar you emotionally claim they "feel as if they've been raped".
Most people, and I think that includes you, also have no idea what landing in bed with a transsexual person feels like. Yes, I know rape is a serious experience and for people that went through that it feels like nothing in the world can be worse, but it doesn't mean you can just invalidate others' feelings based on yours.
I'm doubting it would cause trauma in anybody who has not decided as a matter of policy to ensure that nobody might ever think of them as anything but exclusively heterosexual.
Yes, we don't all suck dicks just because we're repressing our actual bisexuality, and being heterosexual is just a game we're playing for fun.
I guess you also tell gays that they could get along with a girl if they just "tried" and stopped "being fancy"?
Since that's been the exact line of argument consistently run by @Fox in TTTCBN, it appears we have reached common ground. Must be barbecue time.
The transsexual person in the scenario got yelled at. And deservedly so, because it could be avoided just by being upfront about an issue that's not just important, but pretty much raison d'etre of going to bed for almost all people.
But of course, for you bleeding hearts, someone being angry with you is sooo much worse that someone touching your dick unwillingly.
trauma != "a problem"
Okay, so any trauma about the fact that you just got into an experience that runs contrary to your orientation - it's all in your head, man, it's your fault for being mentally broken.
-
serious enough, in fact, to render consent to sex uninformed and invalid, thereby making any consequent sexual contact amount to rape of the "deceived" by the trans non-discloser.
Yeah, that never happened.
-
Fuck, now I have to write a reply. Deceptions of any kind are bad, and a valid reason to be very angry. But if there's one thing I cannot stand, it's people who broaden the definition of rape.
Read what I wrote. It doesn't say what the mischaractetizing Australian says that it says.
From his mischaractetizing you would think that I had said that I was calling for such deception to be legally prosecutable under the law. I did no such thing.
-
-
it was done purposefully
I was actually petty sure it was but since apparently nobody took it upon them to comment I felt a remark was necessary.
Honestly, sir, your lack of faith in me is hurtful!
Same to you, old chap.
-
And what is this parallel universe you live in where insulting the mods/admin staff of a forum is a good idea?
Disagreeing with admins is fun!
-
Same to you, old chap.
Damn it, now I feel sorry... kiss and make up? Doors of my closet are always open to you, dear friend!
-
make up
Why don't you have any soft pink lip gloss? That would really suit you.
I want that eyeliner!
-
No, I'm arguing that failure to disclose trans status when not asked about it should not count as deception to any reasonable person, any more than would failure to disclose a hairy back or prosthetic breast or awful dental caries.
That is not a strawman but does has straw in it so I can pass it off as a strawman.
There are any number of things one could find out about a prospective sex partner that could cause an initial attraction to vanish instantly because ewwww. Obviously any of those could be quite legitimate grounds for disappointment. The only one I have ever seen held up as legitimate grounds for fury is possession of unexpected genitalia. I have yet to see a reasoned argument in support of treating this as a special case.
Well if we follow your initial logic finding out that someone has a hairy back qualifies as a reason for fury too.I can agree that fury and roasting them over coals is probably a bit excessive but telling them to fuck off isn't. The problem I had was that apparently you can't do that. That's transphobic and now you're a transphobe and this somehow is connected with suicide rates.
You can fuck right off.
Let your hate run through you. Let it thrive! ^_^
-
Given the context maybe a wrong food choice
I think it would be fine, so long as none of them split down the side when you cook them.
-
Let your hate run through you. Let it thrive! ^_^
YES!
Also, it's not the evil conspiracy members that keep baiting for further escalation, it's the unreasonable people on the other side.
-
Side note: I gave up on reading this thread properly about 100 posts in.
-
Side note: I gave up on reading this thread properly about 100 posts in.
I'm not inclined to believe that. No one in this forum can resist the chance at a good troll. O_o
-
-
@boomzilla said:
No, I know you can't back up your imaginary claims. I just want to make it clear that your excuses for not providing proof are just fig leafs for your lies.
Fine,you know what? Here you fucking go.
People saying it's okay to throw a hissy cow upon finding that a woman they intended to have sex with is trans.
People half-assedly suggesting "treatments"lol. So you're still using out of context quotes that were (if you used them in context and included the whole quote) a Discourse joke.
Brillant. You do realize misquoting people and using out of context words literally makes you no better the Fox News, right? But you keep on lying to try to prove a point that doesn't exist. It's a good use of your energy.
-
Also, it's not the evil conspiracy members that keep baiting for further escalation, it's the unreasonable people on the other side.
I thought both sides were evil conspiracies duking it out in the great standoff?
-
Side note: I gave up on reading this thread properly about 100 posts in.
WORKS_AS_INTENDED
Seriously. This is how it works: make a reply mocking Fox, because he's being an libelous Tim Allen. Come back to the thread later. Read the first 10 new posts, because they might have a reply to you. Skip the next 100 or so, because it's just going to be Fox arguing with Windmills that identify as Wind Powered Turbines. Find one of the last 10 posts that you can make a mocking reply to. Do so. Go enjoy the rest of the forum for a few days.
-
Yeah, that never happened.
So you don't recall writing
I would put that sort of deception akin to rape.
or
I would feel extremely deceived, betrayed and basically raped if I unknowingly got physical with a transgendered person.
-
Are we talking rape or rape rape? Look, that stuff is a logical conclusion of defining rape to be non-consensual sex and the modern definition of consent relying on the ability of the parties to give their consent.
-
Are we talking rape or rape rape?
Fucking hell you actually need to qualify the word rape.I didn't rape that squirrel... I raped that squirrel. There's a difference.
Fucking hell you do realize we haven't just hit the bottom of the well here. We've actually asked for shovels to be thrown down and now we're digging for China.
Fucken hell I'll actually have brain aneurysms if this continues any longer.
-
Are we talking rape or rape rape?
I dunno. Maybe you should ask one of the shitlords playing the victimization card.
-
-
Fucking hell you actually need to qualify the word rape.
That's riffing on Whoopi Goldberg rationalizing how Roman Polanski drugged a 13 year old girl and then anally raped her:
-
I dunno. Maybe you should ask one of the shitlords playing the victimization card.Who, whom.
-
Fucken hell I'll actually have brain aneurysms if this continues any longer.
Agreed. No idea why I'm still reading, either.
Also, this place being troll central I have no idea who's serious and who's not, which is why I said that I don't think that this forum is a good place for such discussions above.
And a post that just streamed in would suggest it was a joke....
I'm out of here.
-
@DogsB said:
That just makes it slightly funnier but no less retarded.Fucking hell you actually need to qualify the word rape.
That's riffing on Whoopi Goldberg rationalizing how Roman Polanski drugged a 13 year old girl and then anally raped her:
-
That just makes it slightly funnier but no less retarded.
It's nice to have one's work appreciated.
-
Are we talking rape or rape rape?
Wait, are you talking "rape" rape, or "rape" rape rape?
-
My false consciousness doesn't permit me to differentiate, sadly.
-
-
It's a blakeymeme, fox.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Discourse joke.
How many times must i point out that just because it's a "joke" doesn't make it okay to condone assault, violence, and/or murder?!
-
He even has the gumption to drag it into the lounge.
I think you missed the part where the OP was the one who dragged it into the lounge.
He wasn't in there five minutes and people suddenly became worried about PII for the first time in an internet age.
And to paraphrase my response, fuck you for thinking I'm anywhere close to as much of a complete scumbag as you are.
-
finding out that someone has a hairy back qualifies as a reason for fury too
Show me data demonstrating that hairy-backed people suffer abuse and assaults at rates comparable to those experienced by trans people, and I'll concede that you might have a point.
