OOTS #1162 - The Discussion Thread

[zimmerwald1915]

I'll make things easier: think of me as the lawyer for a rape victim that, in a scenario with no rape shield laws, when the opposition begins to question what she was wearing, begins, in turn, to argue that the family of the defendant should be executed.

(You'd get not only disbarred, and not only sued, but also probably jailed. Better to think of yourself as a pundit commenting on such a rape trial.)

[hroþila]

I'll make things easier: think of me as the lawyer for a rape victim that, in a scenario with no rape shield laws, when the opposition begins to question what she was wearing, begins, in turn, to argue that the family of the defendant should be executed.

In what universe does this analogy work in your favour?

[Peelee]

He barely had a staff...He had, like, two assistants? Maybe a third?

If you only count the paid ones, sure. But think of the interns!

[The_Weirdo]

(You'd get not only disbarred, and not only sued, but also probably jailed. Better to think of yourself as a pundit commenting on such a rape trial.)

Sure. Fair enough. A pundit begins asking what she was wearing and implying that she somehow deserved it and so on and so forth; my reaction is to call for the execution of the defendant's family, then his neighborhood. And if the first pundit doesn't want me arguing for that, then he needs to stop arguing what-was-she-wearingisms and how the rape was just a few minutes anyways and oh, look, she's not even pregnant so no long-term issues, etc.

In what universe does this analogy work in your favour?

In the universe in which the what-was-she-wearing debate is shut down right now and everyone is terrified of what might happen if it's reopened.

[KorvinStarmast]

think of me as the lawyer

Career advice: stay out of court rooms. Your talents and skills serve mankind better in your current position.

[Keltest]

Sure. Fair enough. A pundit begins asking what she was wearing and implying that she somehow deserved it and so on and so forth; my reaction is to call for the execution of the defendant's family, then his neighborhood. And if the first pundit doesn't want me arguing for that, then he needs to stop arguing what-was-she-wearingisms and how the rape was just a few minutes anyways and oh, look, she's not even pregnant so no long-term issues, etc.

As a rule of thumb, if you smell a gas leak, advocating that you light a bonfire in the room is only going to convince people that you have nothing of value to say.

[zimmerwald1915]

If you only count the paid ones, sure. But think of the interns!

They're outside, being trodden on by the labor aristocracy.

[The_Weirdo]

Career advice: stay the hell out of court rooms. Your talents and skills serve mankind better in your current position.

I took Zim's advice.

Anyways:

Pundit A: "But with such a low neckline..."
Me: "He and his entire family should be executed."
Pundit A: "What??? His family too? For just five minutes of..."
Me: "Make it his entire neighborhood."

Best-case scenario, no one ever uses the words "low neckline" in the defense of a rapist ever again. Worst case scenario, I blow off steam.

As a rule of thumb, if you smell a gas leak, advocating that you light a bonfire in the room is only going to convince people that you have nothing of value to say.

Except my solutions are clean, reasonable and perfect. Yours are the ones that would be like lighting a bonfire in this analogy.

[Fyraltari]

Spoiler: Avengers:End Game

Show

At least I am referring to the moment in act 3 when a bunch of secondary characters join the battle just as the bad guys have summoned their own reinforcements.

ETA:

Spoiler: Avengers:End Game

Show

The Hammer was established in Thor 1 as granting "the power of Thor" to whomever it finds worthy. So if someone is worthy, they can channel lightning with the Hammer. Thor doesn't need the Hammer to do so, but was using it as a clutch until reminded he is not the God of Hammers.

Grey Wolf

Spoil1: That has to be in the top ten most used narrative devices, though.
Spoil2. Oh okay, I haven't watched that one.

I'll make things easier: think of me as the lawyer for a rape victim that, in a scenario with no rape shield laws, when the opposition begins to question what she was wearing, begins, in turn, to argue that the family of the defendant should be executed.

Victim: Can I get a different lawyer? I'm beginning to think this trial is rigged against me.

[Peelee]

And if the first pundit doesn't want me arguing for that

I see you are unfamiliar with how pundits work.

They're outside, being trodden on by the labor aristocracy.

So I assume that's a direct parallel to End Game, then?

[Dion]

No, the tragedy is that it is the best possible scenario for their afterlives. But their lives would still be cut tragically short.

Ok, I agree with that.

[Keltest]

I took Zim's advice.

Anyways:

Pundit A: "But with such a low neckline..."
Me: "He and his entire family should be executed."
Pundit A: "What??? His family too? For just five minutes of..."
Me: "Make it his entire neighborhood."

Best-case scenario, no one ever uses the words "low neckline" in the defense of a rapist ever again. Worst case scenario, I blow off steam.

A best-case scenario here is that youre fired from your pundit position and not given work in the field again methinks. Worse scenarios start ending with you on trial or in jail.

[The_Weirdo]

I see you are unfamiliar with how pundits work.

Fine, how about:

Me: "Pundit A, would you want your daughter, who lives in (adress) and (lists her routine habits) to undergo the treatment you defend?"

A best-case scenario here is that youre fired from your pundit position and not given work in the field again methinks. Worse scenarios start ending with you on trial or in jail.

Then why isn't Pundit A jailed for being pro-rape?

[Resileaf]

I'll make things easier: think of me as the lawyer for a rape victim that, in a scenario with no rape shield laws, when the opposition begins to question what she was wearing, begins, in turn, to argue that the family of the defendant should be executed.

There comes a point where you should realize that, if your argument or plan does not work, it would be a better idea to change arguments and plan to something that would work.
Definition of insanity and all that.

[KorvinStarmast]

Ok, I agree with that.

Every dwarf dies, not every dwarf really lives.

[Dion]

Best-case scenario, no one ever uses the words "low neckline" in the defense of a rapist ever again. Worst case scenario, I blow off steam.

No, you’d look like a lunatic, and you’d make everyone who agreed with you look like a lunatic by association.

Next case, people would say: “everyone who isn’t a raving lunatic agrees we should consider the victims neckline in this rape trial. The only people who disagree with that eminently reasonable idea are pro-genocide.”

[Cazero]

Pundit A: "But with such a low neckline..."
Me: "He and his entire family should be executed."
Pundit A: "What??? His family too? For just five minutes of..."
Me: "Make it his entire neighborhood."

Best-case scenario, no one ever uses the words "low neckline" in the defense of a rapist ever again. Worst case scenario, I blow off steam.

Best case scenario : you blow off steam.
Worst case scenario : the insanity of such a disproportionate retribution made "your" side look so bad that the blaming of rape victims is no longer questionned.

[Keltest]

Then why isn't Pundit A jailed for being pro-rape?

Because saying "she did something dumb and got hurt for it" is, while perhaps criminally ignorant, not actually illegal. Demanding that innocent people start being killed is, at best, eyeballing the line, and at worst hurtling over it.

[The_Weirdo]

Because saying "she did something dumb and got hurt for it" is, while perhaps criminally ignorant, not actually illegal. Demanding that innocent people start being killed is, at best, eyeballing the line, and at worst hurtling over it.

You said it, not me.

[The Aboleth]

Oh, it's simple, really: if people argue against genocide instead of arguing for forced marriage, I don't have to argue against forced marriage anymore because the people are no longer arguing for it, having, instead, to argue against genocide. Hence...

"If you have a headache, just cut off your arm! Then you won't be focusing on the headache anymore!"

You really don't see how this approach is counterproductive?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Spoil1: That has to be in the top ten most used narrative devices, though.

Indeed, which is why I didn't suggest Rich got inspired by the film, but rather annoyed that they ended up both using it on the same weekend.

Ok, I agree with that.

I didn't think that was allowed. Instead, you might have to insult me, claim I said something I didn't, and eliminate by fiat every possible response to the issue other than killing broad swathes of sentient beings while claiming to be holding the moral high ground.

Grey Wolf

[Keltest]

You said it, not me.

Are you not familiar with the term? It doesn't actually have anything to do with the legality of anything, its just a form of emphasis.

[The_Weirdo]

"If you have a headache, just cut off your arm! Then you won't be focusing on the headache anymore!"

You really don't see how this approach is counterproductive?

More like: "If you have a headache caused by a guy blowing a whisle in your ear, jump around the room kicking, screaming and throwing things at the guy and around in general to make him stop."

[Keltest]

More like: "If you have a headache caused by a guy blowing a whisle in your ear, jump around the room kicking, screaming and throwing things at the guy and around in general to make him stop."

That's a good way to get a headache caused by somebody clubbing you upside the head. And probably other aches.

[The Aboleth]

More like: "If you have a headache caused by a guy blowing a whisle in your ear, jump around the room kicking, screaming and throwing things at the guy and around in general to make him stop."

You're missing the point. Or deliberately ignoring it.

Probably the latter.

[The_Weirdo]

That's a good way to get a headache caused by somebody clubbing you upside the head. And probably other aches.

But it will teach everyone around the valuable lesson that blowing a whistle in someone's year is a mistake.

You can also get an entire band into the room, lock the room and have them play their hits at top volume.

[Keltest]

But it will teach everyone around the valuable lesson that blowing a whistle in someone's year is a mistake.

More likely it will teach everyone around that going crazy and hurling things at random people because youre mildly annoyed is a huge mistake. And before you say something you think is clever, no, there is no flavor of irrational response that tells people to avoid doing anything other than being irrational.

[Resileaf]

More likely it will teach everyone around that going crazy and hurling things at random people because youre mildly annoyed is a huge mistake. And before you say something you think is clever, no, there is no flavor of irrational response that tells people to avoid doing anything other than being irrational.

Gotta admit though, he's very good into emulating Hilgya in every way.

[The_Weirdo]

Whatever. The Firehelms still deserve to die horribly and spend eternity under the cares of Hel. One by one.

[Resileaf]

Whatever. The Firehelms still deserve to die horribly and spend eternity under the cares of Hel. One by one.

But how would they spend eternity with Hel one by one? Unless there are multiple eternities, it will have to be concurrent.