Are "Trigger Warnings" Now Required?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bowser

Bowser

Namaste
Valued Senior Member
You know, if a simple term throws people off their tracks, how can we possibly discuss anything? I personally don't believe any ideology owns any specific words, that words don't always imply your worst fears. When I post a thread trying to solicit personal experiences, and use a term such as "RED PILL," I'm simply invoking the scene from the Matrix. For Christ's sake, what's wrong with you people?

 
Bowser said:
For Christ's sake, what's wrong with you people?
Click to expand...
Disingenuous solicitations from bigots are against forum rules on three separate points.

It's not about "safe spaces" but rather about the basic coming to terms with reality intrinsic to a science-promoting site. The plural of anecdote is not data. Facts matter therefore people matter.

There is just one reality, not a bifurcated world of red pills and blue pills. Thus you are philosophically and actually in the wrong. That was your choice.
 
Last edited:
rpenner said:
Disingenuous solicitations from bigots are against forum rules on three separate points.

It's not about "safe spaces" but rather about the basic coming to terms with reality intrinsic to a science-promoting site. The plural of anecdote is not data. Facts matter therefore people matter.

There is just one reality, not a bifurcated world of red pills and blue pills. Thus you are philosophically and actually in the wrong. That was your choice.
Click to expand...

"Keep the delusional bigotry to Reddit and other hate sites, where it belongs."

Well, it's not my place to define reality for anyone, thus the question.
 
Here's a primer:

If you are advocating and/or in any way excusing the behavior of a philosophy that advocates violence against a group of people for things beyond their control (Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation etc) then here's a tip - don't fucking do it.

Bigotry is not going to be tolerated... simple as that.
 
Bowser said:
You know, if a simple term throws people off their tracks, how can we possibly discuss anything? I personally don't believe any ideology owns any specific words, that words don't always imply your worst fears. When I post a thread trying to solicit personal experiences, and use a term such as "RED PILL," I'm simply invoking the scene from the Matrix. For Christ's sake, what's wrong with you people?
Click to expand...
No, what is wrong with you?

You aren't fooling anyone.

The whole philosophy behind the "red pill", adopted from the Matrix, is misogyny. The so called red pill is a call to men to awaken their senses and realise that women are inferior. Reddit has a whole frigging board about The Red Pill. It is full of men discussing how women should be subservient and how women must be made to be subservient, not to mention the women's section of the board where victims of rape and domestic violence are encouraged to not deny any man sex, because that is her sole purpose of existing.

So don't give us the disingenuous bullshit that you were invoking the scene from the Matrix.

When you asked the question of who had had an epiphany in regards to the Red Pill, it was pretty damn well clear what you were talking about, especially and given your known attitude towards women on this site. So can the faux outrage. No one is buying it.

Put simply, this site does not tolerate what you try to peddle here.
 
Y'all may not be completely insane
but
you do seem to be working at it:

 
Last edited:
Seems to me Bowser blew it by using the word "epiphany" in relation to the term "red pill". An epiphany is a sudden revelation or insight, implying that that the truth has at last been glimpsed or realised. He didn't say a red pill "delusion", "moment", "feeling or "urge". He chose "epiphany".

And then he didn't qualify what he meant by "red pill" either. Had he meant something more acceptable than the current popular use, he could easily have expanded on that, thereby avoiding giving offence.

I suspect he wanted to provoke and is now whining disingenously, but of course that can't be proved.
 
exchemist said:
Seems to me Bowser blew it by using the word "epiphany" in relation to the term "red pill". An epiphany is a sudden revelation or insight, implying that that the truth has at last been glimpsed or realised. He didn't say a red pill "delusion", "moment", "feeling or "urge". He chose "epiphany".

And then he didn't qualify what he meant by "red pill" either. Had he meant something more acceptable than the current popular use, he could easily have expanded on that, thereby avoiding giving offence.

I suspect he wanted to provoke and is now whining disingenously, but of course that can't be proved.
Click to expand...

It cannot be "proven", but it can be "proven beyond a reasonable doubt".

Case in point - either we accept Bowser is intelligent enough to know what he was posting... or we accept that he is ignorant/foolish/stupid enough to not know better. I guess, really, the decision is up to him...?
 
OK
I had to look it up:

The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are popular culture symbols representing the choice between embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red pill) and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill). The terms, popularized in science fiction culture, are derived from the 1999 film The Matrix.
Click to expand...

In the film clip (post #1)
Who do you think was being unreasonable?
Who do you think seemed blue pill delusional?
Who do you think was embracing reality?

as/re taking the hat off
Do all crazy people wear their baseball caps backward? (excepting catchers---of course)
Is everyone who wears their cap backward crazy?

.................
I'll take Cesare Emiliani's purple pill.
thanx
 
This thread appears to have been inspired by this cesspooled one:

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/red-pill-moment.158593

Frankly, I don't have a clue why that thread was closed and cesspooled. Perhaps one of the moderators should take a short break from aggressively preaching morality (as you see it) to explaining rationally and dispassionately (if you can) why Bowser's seemingly innocuous question received the over-the-top response that it received then ("delusional bigotry") and still is receiving now.
 
Yazata said:
This thread appears to have been inspired by this cesspooled one:

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/red-pill-moment.158593

Frankly, I don't have a clue why that thread was closed and cesspooled. Perhaps one of the moderators should take a short break from aggressively preaching morality (as you see it) to explaining rationally and dispassionately (if you can) why Bowser's seemingly innocuous question received the over-the-top response that it received then ("delusional bigotry") and still is receiving now.
Click to expand...
It was explained. Perhaps you can read what several staff members have written in this and the original thread for your explanation.

Suffice to say, his question was not innocuous. Not with his record of attitude of women on this site. The manner of posing the question was fairly clear.

Unless of course you believe this site should allow a discussion about whether men had finally had an epiphany and finally somehow realised that women are inferior and should be subservient? Because that is what he was asking in reference to the "red pill". That is what the "red pill" is known for and has been like that for quite a while now.

From where he posted it, to how he posed the question, it was fairly clear. That was his undoing in the end. This is not the first time that the staff have had this bizarre dance with Bowser on this subject matter. I can only hope it is the last time.
 
Bells said:
It was explained. Perhaps you can read what several staff members have written in this and the original thread for your explanation.
Click to expand...

Here's the entire text of Bowser's question:

1. "Have you ever had a "Red Pill" moment, an epiphany of some sort? Is so, what was it and how did it come to be?"

That's it, that's the offending post in its entirety, unless something has been removed by a moderator. So, was anything that Bowser wrote removed by a moderator? If something more inflammatory was said, then the response the post is receiving might be justifiable.

Here's the response Bowser's post received from Tiassa:

2. Mod Hat - Closure. Keep the delusional bigotry to Reddit and other hate sites, where it belongs."

So can any of our moderators explain what content in 1 justifies the allegations of "delusional bigotry" in 2? As far as I can see, nothing said in 1. justifies the insults.

Suffice to say, his question was not innocuous.
Click to expand...

Why not?

Not with his record of attitude of women on this site. The manner of posing the question was fairly clear.

Unless of course you believe this site should allow a discussion about whether men had finally had an epiphany and finally somehow realised that women are inferior and should be subservient? Because that is what he was asking in reference to the "red pill". That is what the "red pill" is known for and has been like that for quite a while now.
Click to expand...

You seem to me to be projecting. On its face, nothing Bowser said in 1. has anything to do with women. (Except for their being implicitly included in the question.)

From where he posted it, to how he posed the question, it was fairly clear.
Click to expand...

So what was the context? What fact about that context supposedly justifies all the hostility?

This thread is clearly a response to the cesspooled thread. Was that thread a continuation of some more heated thread somewhere else? What led up to all this craziness?
 
As already explained, the "red pill" phrase itself refers to an intensely bigoted and dangerous ideology. I would provide some links for you, but given I'm at work, I really don't want that in my search history right now...
 
Kittamaru said:
As already explained, the "red pill" phrase itself refers to an intensely bigoted and dangerous ideology. I would provide some links for you, but given I'm at work, I really don't want that in my search history right now...
Click to expand...
While I disagree with Bowser on . . . almost everything, I didn't know about the red pill in that context. Up until now, the only "red pill" reference I knew about was from the Matrix, where it was a metaphor for "seeing reality."
 
The referenced thread seems innocuous. Why not give him enough rope to hang himself? In other words, wait until he actually says something bigoted to condemn him. I never heard that "red pill" translates to bigotry, it seems to have multiple meanings.

Also, the hat guy. I would point and say, "look, a dumbass", and that's it. It's not illegal to have a political expression, it's one of the most protected forms of free speech.
 
billvon said:
While I disagree with Bowser on . . . almost everything, I didn't know about the red pill in that context. Up until now, the only "red pill" reference I knew about was from the Matrix, where it was a metaphor for "seeing reality."
Click to expand...


I thought the same thing. "Taking the Red Pill" just meant that you had your eyes opened to something that was previously unknown to you. Since when has it become a term of intense bigotry and is dangerous? Is there something I've missed? Can someone explain how this term's meaning has changed?
 
I have never heard the use of "Red Pill" in the sexist context that seems well known to some members. Like MacGyver and Yazata it semed to me to be a reference to the Matrix and a choice between reality and reality(?).

Of course the admin team are free to handle threads, posts and members in any way they choose. However, if said member is as problematic as they think then ban him permanently. Don't, instead, close down a thread with implicit claims that everyone can see it was motivated by misogyny. Having been on the receiving end of Bell's prejudicial presumption of misogyny I am almost inclined to feel sympathy for Bowser. (Although comments from other members I do know suggest it might be misplaced.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top