Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
Threads now and then
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8678668" data-attributes="member: 7023840"><p>Strangely, other things are illegal as well.</p><p></p><p>Murder. </p><p>Graverobbing.</p><p>Discussing how to "finish" your opponent so as to maximize your fun while them.</p><p></p><p>I am quite sure that I am comfortable discussing the <em>legalities</em> of issues, or, for that matter, why we are much more comfortable discussing things that have always been regarding as <em>malum in se</em> than <em>malum prohibitum</em>.</p><p></p><p>So that's not rhetorical dodging- as I wrote about, at length (in the part you did not acknowledge), it is more that people should probably do some self-examination as to why this topic is highly stigmatized, why <em>some people</em> aren't comfortable with it, and why that lack of comfort most likely leads to the continued stigmatization which has an adverse effect on the people that are in the industry.</p><p></p><p>Or to put it in a more pithy way- we seem fine discussing stealing and murder, yet we aren't comfortable acknowledging that people have sex. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I assume you will be lecturing me (and others) about how hypothetical juries will react to hypothetical crimes involving hypothetical fact patterns in hypothetical jurisdictions?</p><p>Excellent. </p><p></p><p>When you're analogizing a post asking for some self-interrogation about how our society treats sex and violence to a justification to have people violently attack others with the assumption of jury nullification ... you are probably stretching the essence of "in essence ..." don't you think? </p><p></p><p>In all seriousness, if we are unable to acknowledge that topics that are covered in mainstream papers, using identical language, cannot be discussed- then maybe there are slightly different issues going on? </p><p></p><p>Or is the test what a thirteen year old (assumedly, American) would not be comfortable hearing? That there exists people who have sex. And that some of them do this for money? </p><p></p><p>I am sure that this will be shocking to many in that age group! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I am not arguing with the moderation decision- I never was in that thread. Just noting the hypocrisy of our society, and lamenting that we have normalized violence and demonized sex, and that actions like this (that it is fine for 13 year olds to gleefully discuss violence, but not even be aware of the existence of sex) is part of the problem.</p><p></p><p>It would seem that the moderation of adult <u>topics</u> (as opposed to adult language) is very ... inconsistent. As I wrote, I am glad that when I have needed to detail adult subject matter before, the thread doesn't get shut down. But it seems more like the thread was shut because the subject matter and tone (from that time) is more embarrassing than from a privileged distinction being made.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8678668, member: 7023840"] Strangely, other things are illegal as well. Murder. Graverobbing. Discussing how to "finish" your opponent so as to maximize your fun while them. I am quite sure that I am comfortable discussing the [I]legalities[/I] of issues, or, for that matter, why we are much more comfortable discussing things that have always been regarding as [I]malum in se[/I] than [I]malum prohibitum[/I]. So that's not rhetorical dodging- as I wrote about, at length (in the part you did not acknowledge), it is more that people should probably do some self-examination as to why this topic is highly stigmatized, why [I]some people[/I] aren't comfortable with it, and why that lack of comfort most likely leads to the continued stigmatization which has an adverse effect on the people that are in the industry. Or to put it in a more pithy way- we seem fine discussing stealing and murder, yet we aren't comfortable acknowledging that people have sex. I assume you will be lecturing me (and others) about how hypothetical juries will react to hypothetical crimes involving hypothetical fact patterns in hypothetical jurisdictions? Excellent. When you're analogizing a post asking for some self-interrogation about how our society treats sex and violence to a justification to have people violently attack others with the assumption of jury nullification ... you are probably stretching the essence of "in essence ..." don't you think? In all seriousness, if we are unable to acknowledge that topics that are covered in mainstream papers, using identical language, cannot be discussed- then maybe there are slightly different issues going on? Or is the test what a thirteen year old (assumedly, American) would not be comfortable hearing? That there exists people who have sex. And that some of them do this for money? I am sure that this will be shocking to many in that age group! I am not arguing with the moderation decision- I never was in that thread. Just noting the hypocrisy of our society, and lamenting that we have normalized violence and demonized sex, and that actions like this (that it is fine for 13 year olds to gleefully discuss violence, but not even be aware of the existence of sex) is part of the problem. It would seem that the moderation of adult [U]topics[/U] (as opposed to adult language) is very ... inconsistent. As I wrote, I am glad that when I have needed to detail adult subject matter before, the thread doesn't get shut down. But it seems more like the thread was shut because the subject matter and tone (from that time) is more embarrassing than from a privileged distinction being made. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
Threads now and then
Top