[Scrapped]

[Ifreann]

I'm utterly at a loss as to what topic of conversation this thread is supposed to promote other than "hai guys! this is what I think about this tvtropes page!"

That's.....nice? Get a blog?

I didn't even know tvtropes had a "personal anecdotes" section. Did you know they had that?

Yup. Not relevant to every trope, obviously. You should read the one for Crazy Prepared, amusing stuff.

[Nobel Hobos]

Society? They're a bunch of idiots in school.

Uh-huh, and where do you suppose their behaviour came out of, thin air?

Their behaviour came from many sources. What I object to is that you source that behaviour to something at once indefinable, and speciously specific: Society. The society of the young man whose anecdote you reference is not MY society, and nor is it yours.

You start many good threads. But you also start threads which should be left to howl in the wilderness like abandoned puppies. This is one of the latter type.

I observe that 4.5% of your posts are OP's. This is a very high ratio, and puts you in a range between Neu Mitanni (2.7%) and You-Gi-Owe (7.3%). The longer you post with that ratio, the more criticism you will attract for your motives in starting threads. Some might say that you are abusing the role of thread-starter ... even while admitting that good threads are started for bad reasons and that none of us could post if no-one started a thread.

I'll post again to some other thread started by you. They're a crap-shoot really, but this one is crap and I'm shot of it.

[Quailtopia]

Hayteria, I am confused what you are trying to say or ask.

If this is about who is allowed to hit who, the answer is you shouldn't hit people regardless of gender. If you are getting at something else, then you need to explain it more clearly.

I thought I made myself clear enough. Yes, he shouldn't have resorted to violence. However, that the person resorting to violence would probably be regarded more sympathetically had this been a case of a girl hitting a guy reflects on the inconsistency in the logic with which society views double standards.

EDIT: after rereading OP, I do have to say that relying on consistency when you're talking about sexism is absurd, since 1) the issue is pretty polarizing and 2) if two classes of people are being treated unequally, you cannot expect the marginalized to want anything less than to be in power.

[Hayteria]

I observe that 4.5% of your posts are OP's. This is a very high ratio, and puts you in a range between Neu Mitanni (2.7%) and You-Gi-Owe (7.3%). The longer you post with that ratio, the more criticism you will attract for your motives in starting threads.

Except that you people don't KNOW what my motives are in starting threads, so these criticisms are meaningless.

[Bottle]

I observe that 4.5% of your posts are OP's. This is a very high ratio, and puts you in a range between Neu Mitanni (2.7%) and You-Gi-Owe (7.3%). The longer you post with that ratio, the more criticism you will attract for your motives in starting threads.

Except that you people don't KNOW what my motives are in starting threads, so these criticisms are meaningless.

NH simply points out the truth, which you yourself are already aware of and have complained about: the more of these bloggish OPs you make, the more criticism you will attract. Whether or not you appreciate that criticism is irrelevant to what NH was saying.

I agree with his assessment, personally. A few of your threads have been interesting, but a larger percentage seem to just be blog posts, and this one fits that category. Maybe if you try posing more questions or raising discussion topics it will help.

[Hayteria]

Except that you people don't KNOW what my motives are in starting threads, so these criticisms are meaningless.

NH simply points out the truth, which you yourself are already aware of and have complained about: the more of these bloggish OPs you make, the more criticism you will attract. Whether or not you appreciate that criticism is irrelevant to what NH was saying.

I agree with his assessment, personally. A few of your threads have been interesting, but a larger percentage seem to just be blog posts, and this one fits that category. Maybe if you try posing more questions or raising discussion topics it will help.

At least you took a less presumptuous interpretation to this, but still, I thought I did raise a bit of a discussion topic; I'm talking about the implications of that anecdote with respect to double standards and hypocrisy.

[Ashmoria]

I'm utterly at a loss as to what topic of conversation this thread is supposed to promote other than "hai guys! this is what I think about this tvtropes page!"

Uh, no, I'm talking about the implications of one of the anecdotes within it. Nice strawman though.

it makes no sense to pretend that stuff from tv shows or movies reflects real life.

when you find this sort of thing happening in REAL LIFE then you can say its an inconsistency.

[Hayteria]

Uh, no, I'm talking about the implications of one of the anecdotes within it. Nice strawman though.

it makes no sense to pretend that stuff from tv shows or movies reflects real life.

when you find this sort of thing happening in REAL LIFE then you can say its an inconsistency.

It WAS a real-life example, unless the person submitting it was lying. That you imply this sort of thing DOESN'T happen in real-life, despite that what I was referring to was a real-life example, seems to reflect poorly on your judgment.

[Horsefish]

Surely the simple answer is that if anyone hits anyone else, without a good reason then they are a dick.

[Hayteria]

Surely the simple answer is that if anyone hits anyone else, without a good reason then they are a dick.

Okay then, so let's set up the two examples being contrast.

The one being referred to on TV tropes was of a guy who was being (heavily and persistently) verbally abused by a group of girls. They would not stop at all. He hit one of them in the face and then everyone sided with them.

This was compared to is the hypothetical set up of a girl being verbally abused by a group of guys and resorting to hitting one of them. Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically.

Would you perceive the reason as having been "equally" good or bad regardless of the gender of the person involved?

[Ashmoria]

it makes no sense to pretend that stuff from tv shows or movies reflects real life.

when you find this sort of thing happening in REAL LIFE then you can say its an inconsistency.

It WAS a real-life example, unless the person submitting it was lying. That you imply this sort of thing DOESN'T happen in real-life, despite that what I was referring to was a real-life example, seems to reflect poorly on your judgment.

yeah i believe everything from the tv tropes site.

but it doesnt matter if ONE story is true or false. inconsistency is party of being human. all that would matter is if it is COMMON. then we can talk about our unwillingness to hold amazons to the same standard as we hold men.

[Horsefish]

Surely the simple answer is that if anyone hits anyone else, without a good reason then they are a dick.

Okay then, so let's set up the two examples being contrast.

The one being referred to on TV tropes was of a guy who was being (heavily and persistently) verbally abused by a group of girls. They would not stop at all. He hit one of them in the face and then everyone sided with them.

This was compared to is the hypothetical set up of a girl being verbally abused by a group of guys and resorting to hitting one of them. Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically.

Would you perceive the reason as having been "equally" good or bad regardless of the gender of the person involved?

Depends on the damage caused by the person, and the realitive factors. I mean, heavily and persistently can be quite varied.

[Hayteria]

It WAS a real-life example, unless the person submitting it was lying. That you imply this sort of thing DOESN'T happen in real-life, despite that what I was referring to was a real-life example, seems to reflect poorly on your judgment.

yeah i believe everything from the tv tropes site.

but it doesnt matter if ONE story is true or false. inconsistency is party of being human. all that would matter is if it is COMMON. then we can talk about our unwillingness to hold amazons to the same standard as we hold men.

According to that anecdote, EVERYONE the guy knew in person sided with the group of girls. That suggests that the double standard IS pretty common, at least where he lives. The only way around this is to assume he was lying; and why exactly would he lie?

[Ashmoria]

Surely the simple answer is that if anyone hits anyone else, without a good reason then they are a dick.

Okay then, so let's set up the two examples being contrast.

The one being referred to on TV tropes was of a guy who was being (heavily and persistently) verbally abused by a group of girls. They would not stop at all. He hit one of them in the face and then everyone sided with them.

This was compared to is the hypothetical set up of a girl being verbally abused by a group of guys and resorting to hitting one of them. Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically.

Would you perceive the reason as having been "equally" good or bad regardless of the gender of the person involved?

Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically

and there is your problem

SUPPOSEDLY its setting up a stawman argument, eh?

[Hayteria]

Okay then, so let's set up the two examples being contrast.

The one being referred to on TV tropes was of a guy who was being (heavily and persistently) verbally abused by a group of girls. They would not stop at all. He hit one of them in the face and then everyone sided with them.

This was compared to is the hypothetical set up of a girl being verbally abused by a group of guys and resorting to hitting one of them. Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically.

Would you perceive the reason as having been "equally" good or bad regardless of the gender of the person involved?

Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically

and there is your problem

SUPPOSEDLY its setting up a stawman argument, eh?

Have you any counterargument? Let's just think about the logic here, do you really think that if a girl was being picked on by a group of guys, and that she ended up hitting one of them, that everyone would side with the guys?

[Ashmoria]

yeah i believe everything from the tv tropes site.

but it doesnt matter if ONE story is true or false. inconsistency is party of being human. all that would matter is if it is COMMON. then we can talk about our unwillingness to hold amazons to the same standard as we hold men.

According to that anecdote, EVERYONE the guy knew in person sided with the group of girls. That suggests that the double standard IS pretty common, at least where he lives. The only way around this is to assume he was lying; and why exactly would he lie?

he hit a girl in the head. what did he expect the reaction would be?

you are so far off base on this thing that i dont know why you bothered.

[Ashmoria]

Supposedly the girl in that case would be regarded more sympathetically

and there is your problem

SUPPOSEDLY its setting up a stawman argument, eh?

Have you any counterargument? Let's just think about the logic here, do you really think that if a girl was being picked on by a group of guys, and that she ended up hitting one of them, that everyone would side with the guys?

i think that neither you nor i know what would happen and that there would be NO standard response. it would depend entirely on the people involved.

[Norstal]

Somewhere along the line, someone abandoned consistency.

If I see a group of men bullying a woman (for whatever fucking reasons us adults have, because we really have nothing else to do) and the woman hits back, whilst no one would urge the woman to apologize, its still be as bad.

[Hayteria]

According to that anecdote, EVERYONE the guy knew in person sided with the group of girls. That suggests that the double standard IS pretty common, at least where he lives. The only way around this is to assume he was lying; and why exactly would he lie?

he hit a girl in the head. what did he expect the reaction would be?

Blatant sidestep. Everyone sided with them, do you think the same would happen if the genders were reversed?

But for what it's worth I may as well address the question; people tend not to think rationally when they're upset, which is the kind of thing a group of girls trying to upset a guy by ceaselessly insulting him will do.

[Hayteria]

Have you any counterargument? Let's just think about the logic here, do you really think that if a girl was being picked on by a group of guys, and that she ended up hitting one of them, that everyone would side with the guys?

i think that neither you nor i know what would happen and that there would be NO standard response. it would depend entirely on the people involved.

Why would it?

[Ashmoria]

he hit a girl in the head. what did he expect the reaction would be?

Blatant sidestep. Everyone sided with them, do you think the same would happen if the genders were reversed?

But for what it's worth I may as well address the question; people tend not to think rationally when they're upset, which is the kind of thing a group of girls trying to upset a guy by ceaselessly insulting him will do.

i think that if a tough girl suddenly punched a guy in the head when there was no physical stuff before that that the crowd would not think that she was a hero but some kind of lunatic who would be arrested for battery.

[Ashmoria]

i think that neither you nor i know what would happen and that there would be NO standard response. it would depend entirely on the people involved.

Why would it?

because thats how life works.

[Hayteria]

Blatant sidestep. Everyone sided with them, do you think the same would happen if the genders were reversed?

But for what it's worth I may as well address the question; people tend not to think rationally when they're upset, which is the kind of thing a group of girls trying to upset a guy by ceaselessly insulting him will do.

i think that if a tough girl suddenly punched a guy in the head when there was no physical stuff before that that the crowd would not think that she was a hero but some kind of lunatic who would be arrested for battery.

I don't think she'd be regarded as a hero, but I do think a lot more of the blame would be shifted onto the guys for "provoking" her in the first place. In the anecdote's case, everyone sided with the girls despite their heavy verbal abuse directed towards the guy.

[Hayteria]

Why would it?

because thats how life works.

... do you have any reasons more specific than that? o.o

[Ashmoria]

i think that if a tough girl suddenly punched a guy in the head when there was no physical stuff before that that the crowd would not think that she was a hero but some kind of lunatic who would be arrested for battery.

I don't think she'd be regarded as a hero, but I do think a lot more of the blame would be shifted onto the guys for "provoking" her in the first place. In the anecdote's case, everyone sided with the girls despite their heavy verbal abuse directed towards the guy.

go figure.

he escalated verbal abuse into violence that could have killed her.

that makes him wrong. very very wrong.