Talk:Rape
Is there a template for "What the fuck is that supposed to be? English? I don't think so, pal"? --Furore23 12:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
There's the bad article template. Which I think fits this one perfectly.
Serious dog 13:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes. I get what OP is going for, but Ye Gods! Learn to syntax, son!
I suck at keeping things concise.
Serious dog 03:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I fix'd it :D
I would re-roll all misses in the first round of combat against you guys. 26/08/2013
Looook mr/ms vandal. I'm more or less with you regarding the contents of this article. Language effects thought, rape culture, ect. and so forth, but I'm going to tell you the same thing I tell anybody. If you actually want your changes to stick and not just get reverted make the effort to rewrite the article in a way that's funny and informative. "Crass idiocy" is, for better or for worse, a big part of /tg/'s stock and trade. This site is for holding a mirror up to that, not to advance a social agenda no matter how noble. --Petro (talk) 04:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Which greek gods were rapists by the standards of the ancient greeks?--Emerald Claw (talk) 01:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Why was the Greco-Roman part removed?--Emerald Claw (talk) 10:46, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
- It was wrong. Rape in its archaic form meant to steal or to snatch, not the bizarre scenario presented.--The Forgefather
- They're talking about rape as in non-consensual sex, or what could be considered non-consensual by society, meaning the scenario presented would be considered rape (and as such it doesn't deserve to get removed in an article talking about rape). -- Triacom (talk) 13:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
- It has nothing to do with liking or not liking something, it's just wrong. That isn't what the word itself meant in Rome, that isn't how the act of rape was defined in Rome, and that isn't what happened in the Rape of the Sabines. I don't like it, but I don't like it because it isn't factual.--The Forge Father
- Furthermore, even if what is written above isn't true, that section of text doesn't pertain to rape as rape pertains to traditional games. Heldrakes rape MEQs whether or not Greeks had parental consent. Elf slaves get raped without regard to what Theseus thought the act was.--The Forgefather
- They're talking about rape as in non-consensual sex, or what could be considered non-consensual by society, meaning the scenario presented would be considered rape (and as such it doesn't deserve to get removed in an article talking about rape). -- Triacom (talk) 13:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
The wording is still awkward, and most readers can infer from context that the list given isn't sexual.--The Forgefather
- How exactly is it awkward? If you want to make sure that you're talking about non-sexual rape, you need to state it or completely rewrite the definition above the list, simple as that. -- Triacom (talk) 14:42, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
- The syllabic accent pattern in "Non-Sexual" is one not ordinarily found within Low Gothic, which causes the phrase to sound jarring to speakers of that tongue. Additionally, adding the phrase protracts the length of the section title to an extent not consistent with the brevity of the rest of the article. There is no need to alter the definition at the top of the page, because it already explains that rape on the tabletop is different from rape behind a dumpster. Even if it didn't, we can safely assume that the average wiki browser is not so bereft of wit that he is unable to make the connection on his own.-- The Forgefather
- Here's the problem, the article says this is the definition of non-sexual rape: Getting "raped" in the non-sexual sense, is being utterly dominated by the opposition with no hope of relief. Here;s the definition for rape: performing a sexual act on a person without their consent. Now the problem is that it does NOT explain rape on the tabletop is different to sexual rape in any way, shape or form, unless you add the "Non-sexual" modifier to the tabletop examples. Yes the average person would figure it out but all that means is the examples are for the wrong definition (as they are not rape in action), and really you're worried about people speaking the in-universe language? One more thing, to sign your posts, just hit the tilde key four times. -- Triacom (talk) 23:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
- //Now the problem is that it does NOT explain rape on the tabletop is different to sexual rape in any way, shape or form...// Yes it does. It provides a definition for one scenario, and a definition for the other scenario. This is more than sufficient. This is more than sufficient because this is the same extent to which dictionaries go to distinguish between multiple definitions of the same word. You practically answered your own query here, this point is not under contention.
- //and really you're worried about people speaking the in-universe language?// Low Gothic is for all intents and purposes English. In case you are not familiar with the term, what I created here is known as a "joke." Specifically, this "joke" is of a subtype known as a "pun" or "play on words."
- So you realize that it provides the definitions for two scenarios, yet you keep on trying to use the sexual definition. If you don't say that it is "non-sexual" then it is sexual because the standard definition is sexual, which is why you have to say it is not sexual. I don't know why that's so hard for you to get, if you take away the non-sexual part then you are using a definition which is factually incorrect for the examples. Let's briefly look at something you said though: "It provides a definition for one scenario, and a definition for the other scenario." Nowhere on those definitions does it ever make a reference to tabletop gameplay. Not even in the edit I reverted, because you just referenced the 4chan board, not any tabletop game. I'll admit that I missed the Low Gothic joke, to be honest I confused it with High Gothic (Latin) and since I don't know Latin, I assumed you were making a different joke. -- Triacom (talk) 07:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
- Here's the problem, the article says this is the definition of non-sexual rape: Getting "raped" in the non-sexual sense, is being utterly dominated by the opposition with no hope of relief. Here;s the definition for rape: performing a sexual act on a person without their consent. Now the problem is that it does NOT explain rape on the tabletop is different to sexual rape in any way, shape or form, unless you add the "Non-sexual" modifier to the tabletop examples. Yes the average person would figure it out but all that means is the examples are for the wrong definition (as they are not rape in action), and really you're worried about people speaking the in-universe language? One more thing, to sign your posts, just hit the tilde key four times. -- Triacom (talk) 23:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
- The syllabic accent pattern in "Non-Sexual" is one not ordinarily found within Low Gothic, which causes the phrase to sound jarring to speakers of that tongue. Additionally, adding the phrase protracts the length of the section title to an extent not consistent with the brevity of the rest of the article. There is no need to alter the definition at the top of the page, because it already explains that rape on the tabletop is different from rape behind a dumpster. Even if it didn't, we can safely assume that the average wiki browser is not so bereft of wit that he is unable to make the connection on his own.-- The Forgefather
Moralfagging, again[edit]
We're being targeted by the Good People again in Current Year, since they didn't succeed in 2013. Reckon this last vandal was doing da'wa: giving us poor infidels the chance to repent before the site gets #canceled.--Zimriel (talk) 21:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
