Q:That's true about the title libertarian. Odd considering it originated as a term used by socialist/anarchists to describe their ideology.
I’ve gotta say, that’s not exactly the whole story. The actual origins of the term come from a philosophical position in the Free Will vs. Determinism debate, describing those who believe in the metaphysical concept of Free Will (not the political one).
It got adopted to mean the position of defending free will (now it’s the political one). It had a general air of “freedom fighters” to it (still pre-1800s) making strong appearances in French political literature. It was only notably adopted into full synonymy with anarchism / anarchist publications around the mid-1800s.
It’s meaning grew as the population and influence of the US grew in response to industrial revolution from the late 1800s onwards, giving the young American populace the power and authority to redefine libertarianism as more aligned with their budding values.
Angel SE2E08: Cordelia’s great response to hearing about yet another supernatural artifact requiring the sacrifice of virgin women. (good time to ask, "What about the men?" Where are all the virgin male sacrifices, huh?)
The thing about the term “libertarian” is that it’s been used in so many different ways over history, ways that still affect our perception of the term - but they affect our perception not-so-unanimously.
If we want to make it easy on ourselves, there are three kinds of libertarianism to keep in mind: left libertarianism, right libertarianism, and socialist libertarianism. While left libertarianism and socialist libertarianism have enough similarities that they’ve been used synonymously, someone who identifies with left libertarianism will feel more at home with the term “anarchism”, whereas the socialist libertarian had closer bonds to the concept of communism. I’d wager socialist libertarianism is dying out in the Western world (or rather, it’s just slowly integrating into left libertarianism). Right libertarianism is market libertarianism: anarcho-capitalism and the free market. Not all of right libertarianism feels at home with the term anarcho-capitalism, especially from American viewpoints that feel a disdain towards anarchism from its leftist usages.
When I think of the phrase libertarian, I am most likely to identify it with a soft right libertarian, one who places strong value in the whole free market laissez-faire “I cuddle my money and guns at night so don’t tread on me” attitude. Socially and culturally, I’ve come to associate it with an insensitivity towards others - a pride taken in a lack of empathy, and an emotional/mental disassociation on the grounds of individualism.
But it’s weird to think that with any given utterance of the word libertarian, it is possible for the person to be speaking about an anarchist, a socialist, or a capitalist (in favour of plutocracy).
Q:What can you tell me about anarcho-capitalism? I'm just curious about what it is, thanks :)
It’s a kind of anarchism that replaces the state with privately funded enterprises. A lot of people rightly criticize it for not really being anarchism because of this. It doesn’t really resemble a stateless society, but at least it’s a state that’s honest about its source. Democratic capitalism rarely if ever outright admits in its politics and legal matters that it is, in fact, a capitalist production. So hey, at least anarcho-capitalism does something better than the current system.
It doesn’t change the crucial fact about modern society that it takes money to a) get money, b) have power, and c) procure basic human necessities.
In short, if you don’t like the restrictions set up by one institution, just pay another institution you do agree with more money so they can make the rules.
Like many forms of anarchism and libertarianism, it equally stresses the concept of voluntary action/participation. Which is why so many people gripe about anarchism, because they imagine this horrible world where only the pious few toil away while everyone else “voluntarily” lays around on their asses. (On the other hand, it’s certainly not something people could adjust to right away, at best it’s a very long-term shift required to move our economic and political ideology into voluntary societies).
Q:Do u have nice hair?
I have mutt hair. It does everything hair shouldn’t. It can get frizzy, overly curly, overly limp, too greasy, too dry, reacts to too much humidity in the summer, never stays the way I try to do it in the morning. Almost has a mind of its own. An evil mind.
Q:Why dont you own a sexy lightsaber
I only own a regular lightsaber. I’m not sure what a sexy lightsaber would be. Do they have… curves? Are they secretly just vibrators? If you open up the bottom part, do provocatively naked pictures of Mace Windu fall out?
No being is so important that he may usurp the rights of another.
Q:Whoa whoa whoa hold up... What do you got against Joss Whedon?
There are things about the way he creates some his characters that sometimes give me the heebie-jeebies. And his eerie fondness of adding in the token black guy to everything he produces. Mr. Trick, Forrest Gates, Charles Gunn…
(I’ve never really seen Dollhouse)
It’s kind of like he believes that having more than one main black character on screen at the same time will make them both explode.
Shepard Book, Zoe Washburne…Deathlock, Raina…hey waiddaminnit.
Deathlok wasn’t created by Whedon, so…
Book and Washburne in Firefly is the only (correct me if I’m wrong) originally Whedon production which has more than 1 black person as a main character on set at the same time. Which is extremely disappointing. Not to say it’s any worse than most other NY producers, but I feel like people have been praising Whedon for more than just good stories - they praise him for “breaking out of the Hollywood box” which is barely true if at all.
I have to kind of refrain from this kind of criticism when it comes to his Marvel stuff because he didn’t create that world, he just works within it with what he’s given.
We have no hard proof about the existence of extraterrestrial intelligent life. We have no proof that if they did exist, they have ever tried to contact us. But we still intentionally send signals out into space, carrying various messages, in hopes that maybe someday, someone will…
500 yrs ago everybody KNEW that the earth was the center of the universe.
The reason people clung onto the belief that the Earth was the center of the universe is because of… religion. It confirmed their theories of God creating humankind as the singularly most important species, having the universe created for us alone.
Even so, what these people got wrong was the position and rotation of planets. They weren’t wrong to believe planets exist or rotate - their erroneous conclusions are based on physical / visible evidence. To fabricate an omniscient deity is on a whole different plane of wrong compared to screwing up a few cosmic charts.
Q:But i mean really whats the difference between saying, "Man we really got raped that round" and "Man they murdered us that round"? They both exaggerate something negative to show how badly one was beaten. Murder and rape are both bad things that happen, murder arguably being less desirable for the person but less likely to leave trauma. I mean, you can say, " im gonna blow my brains out" or "I'll kill you you if you do that" And everyone knows your joking why doesnt that translate to rape?
But i mean really whats the difference between saying, “Man we really got raped that round” and “Man they murdered us that round”?
When it is said in communities composed of almost entirely middle-class white men is when it is clearly and most predominantly a problem, because they cannot begin to personally grasp the sort of fear surrounding those events. They don’t feel that fear because they’ve never been taught to. It’s used casually in these venues because nobody in that venue is at a particular risk for the crime. When someone who is at particular risk (or even just made to feel so by society) enters into these communities, the refusal to ditch that terminology is a refusal to let anyone who isn’t exactly like you into that community. Saying “rape” when gaming establishes boundaries of who is welcome or unwelcome.
They both exaggerate something negative to show how badly one was beaten
And I don’t think I have to explain why to any sane individual why associating rape with victory or dominance is not acceptable.
you can say, ” im gonna blow my brains out” or “I’ll kill you you if you do that” And everyone knows your joking why doesnt that translate to rape?
Except it doesn’t. That’s not how it works and that’s definitely not what a “joke” is. When youth display extreme aggressiveness or are caught saying “I’m going to blow your brains out”, “I’m going to rape you”, we send them to counseling to monitor their behaviour. We take it seriously. We have to, because it happens.
If someone says “I’m gonna blow your brains out” enough times, I believe they want to. If someone says, “I’m going to rape you”, you better fucking bet I’m going to believe they want to, and it’s no stretch of the imagination.
If you think it’s acceptable to say to an opponent just because it’s about “beating” someone, imagine playing a sport or game with a woman face-to-face and yelling “I’m going to rape you!” at her.
Q:Why do you think "rape jokes" are wrong? Do you think jokes about all forms of violence are wrong, or only rape? What makes it different?
We can all generally be afraid of something like murder: it is something that can indiscriminately be used against a person of any sex or gender (though does discriminate on levels of race or class). Rape is one of the most underreported crimes, and when it is it has one of the highest rates of perpetrators walking away without even being fined. The threat of being raped on any given day is not something people of all genders are indiscriminately affected by. Women are more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted (by a stranger, friend, partner, or even family member) than they are to be murdered based on examination of comparative crime rates alone. When rape is more common than even smoking, it’s something we need to pay attention to.
Rape jokes fail to take this crime seriously. People who tell these jokes would rarely use the same sort of joviality or casualness with jokes about brutal beatings or murder. You don’t hear many jokes about serial killers. You don’t regularly hear people throwing in subtle references to extremely violent abuse, assault, genocide the same way you hear people talk and joke about rape.
On the internet alone, if you want a joke indicative of rape or sexual assault, you can find one in the midst of an average forum - if you want jokes about serial killers, you usually have to go to forums or websites explicitly denoting inappropriate or twisted humor. Mass murder jokes get on sickpedia; rape jokes get on reddit, facebook, cracked, youtube, the comments section on news sites…
We don’t live in a culture that really teaches men to be afraid of the threat of rape by constantly hounding them with things they need to do to prevent their own sexual assault. I think it’s wrong to joke about something when we’ve elevated the fear of that something to insurmountable levels. And it’s wrong to ignore that these jokes can be used as ammunition against women.
I think it’s wrong to joke about that which brings the greatest amount of stress and fear to others. Because jokes are supposed to make us feel better, not worse. The greatest comedians are those who make our lives better for being a part of it, not worse. I think people are definitely understanding that message lately with the event of Robin Williams’ death.
Tabletop RPG and the “Nice Guy”
A lot of guys within the RPG community can talk about being inclusive and respectful and post articles talking about something like empowering women players in D&D, and yet still make rape jokes and similar offensive or sexual humor / references at the table. What’s more, they can claim total ignorance when called out for making a rape joke when “all they did” was make a implicitly sexual joke referencing the violation or disregard of consent.
No matter how many links these kind of people post on facebook, reddit, or tumblr talking about strong women and gaming inclusivity, it doesn’t mean you have to stay silent when they say something out of line. When someone at the gaming table wants to call themselves a “good feminist ally” but doesn’t let that theory into their practice, you better believe we’re going to be upfront and honest with them about their misdemeanours.
Gaming guys, I’d like to use this opportunity to ask you to take a moment and think about whether anything (jokes, references, etc.) you commonly say at the table stems from abuse or sexual assault.