 |
Sinfest
welcome to the fest
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mouse
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 15446
Location: under the bed
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Heretical Rants wrote: | | mouse wrote: | | it's just something you avoid doing when there will be negative consequences to you. |
And also negative consequences to other people, yes.
| Quote: |
you are trying to confuse action with intent. |
Not really. The intent in question is sexual gratification, yes? I don't see how that intent is wrong.
Certainly, sometimes intent can render an action to be wrong, but not when the intent is harmless. |
actually, the intent in that specific case is why you are throwing water around.
and clearly you have missed the whole discussion on why so many of us feel the whole leering-at-women thing is NOT harmless.
it's only about 17 pages now, we'll wait while you catch up.
_________________
aka: neverscared! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mouse
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 15446
Location: under the bed
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Heretical Rants wrote: | | And then Squig acknowledged her athleticism. And everyone was happy. The end. |
exactly. squig grew beyond seeing her as merely a sexual object, and valued her for the skill she was demonstrating.
he showed the ability to evolve, unlike some others we can name.
_________________
aka: neverscared! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogen
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 9290
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lich Mong wrote: | | Dogen wrote: |
Because using a person as an object of sexual gratification is dehumanizing them - it boils their value down to the level of their ability to gratify you sexually. In my opinion, anything that denies people their humanity is wrong. |
So, you (who is obviously not mouse who obviously doesn't agree with you on everything, but I guess you'll do) said earlier(and linked a citation) that the brain knows the difference between a picture of a person, a person, and a drawing.
So, are you of the opinion that there is fundamental difference in the morality of objectifying those 3 things?
Only one of them is a person. |
That's unfortunately an overly simplistic understanding of what it means to recognize that cartoons aren't people. You can recognize a cartoon isn't a person, but then use it as a representation of a person, in which case while you know you're not watching a person you're still thinking about objectifying a person (predominantly because you can't have sex with a cartoon).
Is it wrong to watch cartoons because they're funny, even if a cat gets blown up by a mouse? No. But if you use the cartoon as a representation of a human being so that you can act out your desire to dehumanize a person, or because the acts you find arousing are harmful to people, then yes. I would consider that wrong. Because the purpose of the exercise is still to dehumanize a person, you're just expressing it in a less harmful way, using a reasonable facsimile.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Heretical Rants
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 3047
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mouse wrote: |
and clearly you have missed the whole discussion on why so many of us feel the whole leering-at-women thing is NOT harmless. |
No, I understand, I just disagree with you about it in certain contexts.
Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lich Mong
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 388
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dogen wrote: | | That's unfortunately an overly simplistic understanding of what it means to recognize that cartoons aren't people. |
No surprising, its not my field.
Anyway,
You state now you don't have any problem with someone laughing at a cartoon cat getting blown up, dispute the fact it does represent something meaningful, mainly a real cat.
Constantly, you said earlier that a video game was not a person, but an object, and had no problem with someone playing them within that context no matter how violent one was, even though the things within it represented people, and the person playing the game was -presumably- killing them.
However, you are now saying that getting sexual gratification out of 'hurting' the representation of a person IS wrong.
Does that mean you feel it's ok for me to play Diablo 3, as long as I don't get aroused while doing it?
Or is what you're saying even more explicit than that. That really and truly the only thing you object to is someone using a representation of a person to play out the very specific sexual fantasy of dehumanizing a real person.
_________________
A MtG Webcomic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogen
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 9290
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lich Mong wrote: | Anyway,
You state now you don't have any problem with someone laughing at a cartoon cat getting blown up, dispute the fact it does represent something meaningful, mainly a real cat.
Constantly, you said earlier that a video game was not a person, but an object, and had no problem with someone playing them within that context no matter how violent one was, even though the things within it represented people, and the person playing the game was -presumably- killing them.
However, you are now saying that getting sexual gratification out of 'hurting' the representation of a person IS wrong.
Does that mean you feel it's ok for me to play Diablo 3, as long as I don't get aroused while doing it? |
I didn't actually say any of that. Or imply it. I said (on page 3 or 4) that your brain knows the difference between representations of things and the things they represent. I avoided saying anything at all about video games other than that.
| Quote: | | Or is what you're saying even more explicit than that. That really and truly the only thing you object to is someone using a representation of a person to play out the very specific sexual fantasy of dehumanizing a real person. |
I object to the dehumanization of people in any context that I'm aware of (that is, if there's one where it doesn't violate my morals I'm unaware of it). But the use of representations in general doesn't bother me. So, yes, it's the specific use - and probably many other specific uses of effigies. One just happens to be the use of representations of people as a means of carrying out fantasies of dehumanizing real people. Whether the people they imagine are real or not, the intent is still to gain sexual gratification from the dehumanizing itself.
It's also worth pointing out that every moral system has a base ideology for which there is no answer to the question, "Why?" except, "Because that's how I feel." If you ask, "Why?" long enough in any ethical quandary you'll reach some assertion that has no basis other than conviction. I feel that dehumanizing people is probably always wrong. I think that our humanity is unique and essential, and that denying it in others belittles it in ourselves. I can't explain why I feel this way. I just know that I do.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darqcyde
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 9086
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mouse wrote: | | because objectifying women is saying that they exist solely, or at least primarily, to serve your sexual desires. |
Is there a human who doesn't do this when they masturbate?
I mean, if you don't ask someone's permission to masturbate about them, aren't you always effectively doing this?
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://12ozlb.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mellifluous
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 100
Location: The Bedazzled Bit By the Buckle in the Bible Belt
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
All I have to say is that for a supposedly boring story arc, this has stirred the Ovaltine up from the bottom for a lot of people, or a vocal minority, but regardless, the debate is on. Issues of equanimity and power and privelege run deep in people, who we are and what we know hinges a lot on those issues So you don't squirt your cornflakes out your nose at every strip; they're making us talk, fight, and clarify our beliefs. I'll take that over the Bazooka Joe tripe any day. Tally-ho!
_________________
Flow like honey, taste like vinegar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yorick
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12065
Location: Mary's kesh
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
This thread added SEVEN FUCKING PAGES since I stopped in some six or so hours ago. Did anything happen or is it more of the same?
_________________
88 NPH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShadowCell
Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 5252
Location: California
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yorick wrote: | | This thread added SEVEN FUCKING PAGES since I stopped in some six or so hours ago. Did anything happen or is it more of the same? |
i got a churro! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yorick
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12065
Location: Mary's kesh
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ShadowCell wrote: | | Yorick wrote: | | This thread added SEVEN FUCKING PAGES since I stopped in some six or so hours ago. Did anything happen or is it more of the same? |
i got a churro! |
that's not a sexual euphemism is it?
_________________
88 NPH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Samsally
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 5311
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yorick wrote: | | ShadowCell wrote: | | Yorick wrote: | | This thread added SEVEN FUCKING PAGES since I stopped in some six or so hours ago. Did anything happen or is it more of the same? |
i got a churro! |
that's not a sexual euphemism is it? |
Of course not.
_________________
Samsally the Gray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yinello
Joined: 10 May 2012
Posts: 1205
Location: Behind you
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aww the person I was hoping to get a reply from never came back. Now I will never get a churro. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yinello
Joined: 10 May 2012
Posts: 1205
Location: Behind you
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
wtf doublepost
Last edited by Yinello on Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:05 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShadowCell
Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 5252
Location: California
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
do not fear Yinello for i will magnanimously share my churro with you
witness my generosity, denizens of Sinfest! Captain Tarantula truly invokes the Form of the Good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
