New Testingstan

adr wrote:i'm inclined to take thanas' side here but i have some doubt

Flagg ruined that thread with his typical one-note tough guy spiel.

Stofsk wrote:i have

i actually have too but i don't remember most of it

Knubble tov wrote:

adr wrote:i'm inclined to take thanas' side here but i have some doubt

Flagg ruined that thread with his typical one-note tough guy spiel.

Has Lagmonster always been a terrible person or is this a recent development? I don't really remember anything he's posted before but everything he's said in the last month or so has made me feel like a worse person having read it.

starku wrote:Attn ford

For w lol can you post a branching event map for gihren's greed in the me3 thread

Say hurtful things like '20 years old' and 'not even about that'

PLZ

is this about how Japanese games got shit right years ago

all while involving robots

Infinity Biscuit wrote:Has Lagmonster always been a terrible person or is this a recent development? I don't really remember anything he's posted before but everything he's said in the last month or so has made me feel like a worse person having read it.

I think his overall point about labeling this as rape being an emotional reaction is valid though. And no he hasn't been, I know him in real life.

In this case I was referring to his statement that the idea that sex isn't always a predatory action by men is neofeminist bullshit.

Yeah, I'm not even sure what he means

Wait, so Lagmonster is one of those "all sex is rape" sorts?

well it's always funny when someone starts derping about "DEM FEMENISTS"

it's pretty bad though when they are derping so hard you can't even tell whether they agree or not with their constructed caricatures

but it's made up for when they then say "why you construct nutty caricatures of those you disagree with "

Akhlut wrote:Wait, so Lagmonster is one of those "all sex is rape" sorts?

Considering that he's happily married with a kid, I doubt it.

Infinity Biscuit wrote:In this case I was referring to his statement that the idea that sex isn't always a predatory action by men is neofeminist bullshit.

You referring to this?

Lagmonster wrote:

Alyeska wrote:Rape isn't about sex. It is about domination.

Certainly rape can be a component of abuse, but the idea that rape isn't about sex, or that sex (particularly male sexuality) isn't inherently predatory in nature, is a product of the neofeminist movement and - in my opinion - full of shit.

I think he's saying there that rape sex is predatory in nature. At least I hope he means that, grammatically though he'd need an extra 'that' in the sentence for that to be the case.

I'm saying that (in the absence of contrary evidence) I don't believe you can have rape without some kind of sexual motive.

So basically Lagmonster's a fuckwit. Good to know.

Zod wrote:

I'm saying that (in the absence of contrary evidence) I don't believe you can have rape without some kind of sexual motive.

So basically Lagmonster's a fuckwit. Good to know.

Why is that? Just because there are people out there who rape simply to get their jollies doesn't mean rape is any less horrible. People use violence and plying people with drugs to get what they want all the time, why not also with sex?

Akhlut wrote:

Zod wrote:

I'm saying that (in the absence of contrary evidence) I don't believe you can have rape without some kind of sexual motive.

So basically Lagmonster's a fuckwit. Good to know.

Why is that? Just because there are people out there who rape simply to get their jollies doesn't mean rape is any less horrible. People use violence and plying people with drugs to get what they want all the time, why not also with sex?

Does it really matter what the motivation is? Rape is one of those crimes where the perception of the victim is more important than the motivations of the attacker.

he might either be saying that by definition sexual violence isn't rape unless the motive is sexual gratification or something

or that people do not rape without such motives

either way he is a fuckwit

Hmm, upon rereading Lagmonster's comment, I see what he is saying now; that without sexual motive, there is no rape. I misread it more as "not all rape is done as a method of showing dominance" sort of thing.

My bad.

Kind of pointless, rape doesn't exist as a charge here anymore, thanks to the way the old laws were written.

Dooey Jo wrote:he might either be saying that by definition sexual violence isn't rape unless the motive is sexual gratification or something

or that people do not rape without such motives

either way he is a fuckwit

i felt good about writing a post that utterly knocked away the foundations of his rage against the goddamn "neofeminists". if he gets all smug and defends his incorrect beliefs, well, then, it's time to start analyzing his hostility. im guessing it's because he thinks, deep down. that feminism got equal rights for women with or before roe v. wade, and everything since then is just trying to destroy men, but i may be assuming that jackassery is a sign of being a men's rights activist again.

He's Canadian, why would he care?

Aaron wrote:He's Canadian, why would he care?

look, i don't know what major victories the feminist movement won in canada that he could use to justify his antifeminism in such a way as to not feel like a shithead like american douchebags use roe v. wade.

Voting I guess, our stuff is more low key and we don't have a fanatical population.

Personally I doubt he's against woman's rights at all, in fact I'll bet he's trying to turn the thread into something other then a bullshit semantics debate.

then why bring up "neofeminist bullshit"?

i mean, he may just be an inarticulate goof or be less of a douchebag than i'm painting him to be, but he's taking a very peculiar route to killing off a semantical argument if that's what he's trying to do.

Person holds position that sex is intrinsically predatory on the part of men = antifeminist????

His position on what constitutes rape is stupid, but watching you guys fumble around with his statement is embarrassing.

F.J. Prefect, Esq wrote:Person holds position that sex is intrinsically predatory on the part of men = antifeminist????

His position on what constitutes rape is stupid, but watching you guys fumble around with his statement is embarrassing.

Saying how third-wave feminism is all terrible and social construction of gender is wrong are two warning signs combined with the dumb opinion on what rape is- I mean, it just doesn't add up for a second-wave radfem. Also, there are totally men who take the position that male sexuality is inherently predatory as part of "Women and men are just different!" though they don't phrase it like that usually. Combined with "social construction of gender is wrong", that adds up to klaxons in my head. But he could just be a general dummy, and I could always be overreacting. It's late-spring levels of heat here right now.