Remove ads

RWBY Thread III: Time To Say Goodbye

Reader mode
Stop: So gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
  • Staff Post
    • so gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
    We get a lot of reports from this thread. A lot of it is just a series of people yelling at each other over arguments that have been rehashed hundreds of times since the end of the recent Volume. And I get that the last Volume - and RWBY in general, really - has some controversial moments that people will want to discuss, argue about, debate, etc.

    That's fine. We're not going to stop people from doing that, because that's literally what the point of the thread is. However, there's just a point where it gets to be a bit too much, and arguments about whether or not Ironwood was morally justified in his actions in the recent Volume, or if RWBY and her team were in the right for withholding information from Ironwood out of distrust, or whatever flavor of argument of the day descend into insulting other posters, expressing a demeaning attitude towards other's opinions, and just being overall unpleasant. That tends to happen a lot in this thread. We want it to stop happening in this thread.

    So! As of now the thread is in a higher state of moderation. What that means is that any future infractions will result in a weeklong boot from the thread, and repeated offenders will likely be permanently removed. So please, everyone endeavor to actually respect the other's arguments, and even if you strongly disagree with them please stay civil and mindful when it comes to responding to others.

    In addition, users should refrain from talking about off-site users in the thread. Bear in mind that this does not mean that you cannot continue to post tumblr posts, for example, that add onto the discussion in the thread, with the caveat that it's related to RWBY of course. But any objections to offsite users in the thread should be handled via PM, or they'll be treated as thread violations and infracted as such.
     
    Last edited:
  • Staff Post
    • The Narrator said:
    ...are they not posting these on YouTube anymore?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Nah. Adpocalypse happened because Youtube got upset over their star vloggers paying kids to show anti-semite messages or filming corpses. Oh, and because someone did a review on a bullet proof armor and said how shitty it was and people said it was "GOOGLE BLOOD MONEH!" because he showed how the armor was crap.

    That and RT really gets more out of FIRST.
     
    Last edited:
    Psyga315 said:
    Nah. Adpocalypse happened because Youtube got triggered over their star vloggers paying kids to show anti-semite messages or filming corpses. Oh, and because someone did a review on a bullet proof armor and said how shitty it was and people said it was "GOOGLE BLOOD MONEH!" because he showed how the armor was crap.

    That and RT really gets more out of FIRST... even if the consumers don't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Joerg Sprave, of the Slingshot channel. Also, it was stabproof.

    Granted, I think it was made stabproof without a seriously jacked German gentleman in mind.
     
    Psyga315 said:
    Nah. Adpocalypse happened because Youtube got triggered over their star vloggers paying kids to show anti-semite messages or filming corpses. Oh, and because someone did a review on a bullet proof armor and said how shitty it was and people said it was "GOOGLE BLOOD MONEH!" because he showed how the armor was crap.

    That and RT really gets more out of FIRST... even if the consumers don't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I've heard of the "paying immigrants to endorse the Alt-reich" and the snuffsploitation drama, but "Google Blood Armor"? What?
     
    Psyga315 said:
    Nah. Adpocalypse happened because Youtube got triggered over their star vloggers paying kids to show anti-semite messages or filming corpses. Oh, and because someone did a review on a bullet proof armor and said how shitty it was and people said it was "GOOGLE BLOOD MONEH!" because he showed how the armor was crap.

    That and RT really gets more out of FIRST... even if the consumers don't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Please don't debase the meaning of the word triggered.

    Also given you can sign up and watch for free on the same or better schedule than YouTube provided the "RT really gets more out of first... even if the consumers don't." things is inaccurate and unfair and I don't like defending companies but come on.
     
    Delphisage said:
    Why should "triggered" be reserved solely for social justice affairs? It's a useful word for describing a questionable/overreactive response using less syllables.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    It is not to do with social justice, the term was meant to be utilized by those suffering from trauma and or PTSD who have specific 'triggers' that set off things like panic attacks or spiraling depressions to name a few examples.

    It is to do with mental health, but ass holes who decided it would be hilarious to try and pretend anyone bothered by anything, like say bigotry, were "Lol, triggered SJWs!" have demeaned it and now people go even further in debasing it by pretending its just for any negative reaction.
     
    Zam said:
    It is to do with mental health, but ass holes who decided it would be hilarious to try and pretend anyone bothered by anything, like say bigotry, were "Lol, triggered SJWs!" have demeaned it and now people go even further in debasing it by pretending its just for any negative reaction.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Namely because the term Trigger has been used inappropriately by those who took advantage of real pain and real afflictions to further their agenda.

    Inappropriate use begets inappropriate use.
     
    Psyga315 said:
    Namely because the term Trigger has been used inappropriately by those who took advantage of real pain and real afflictions to further their agenda.

    Inappropriate use begets inappropriate use.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or something else, but given how you just used it that feels like throwing a stone in your own glass house. Seriously, its easy to not use the term, just say freaked out or something, not being a jerk is easy.
     
    Rule 2 Violation: Respect People with Triggers
    Yes, but "triggered" takes less time to type out. If the only consequence to using this word is that you get triggered by it, then that's not gonna be anywhere near enough to motivate me to not use it. Now somebody change the subject before somebody on the moderation staff decides to "chime in".
     
    Delphisage said:
    Yes, but "triggered" takes less time to type out. If the only consequence to using this word is that you get triggered by it, then that's not gonna be anywhere near enough to motivate me to not use it. Now somebody change the subject before somebody on the moderation staff decides to "chime in".
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    "Scared" would have taken less time than that term so your argument is invalid, and your continued use of that word as a dismissive insult, including against me just makes you rude.


    But fine, alt topic:
    Would anyone in team RWBY be OK with people co-opting terms used to help those with mental health issues for petty or jerkish reasons? I think not!
     
    Zam said:
    I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or something else, but given how you just used it that feels like throwing a stone in your own glass house. Seriously, its easy to not use the term, just say freaked out or something, not being a jerk is easy.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I'm just explaining why triggered went from the mental health term to the parody it is today.

    Though I shall drop the topic for now, on top of editing out the snide remarks I made.
     
    ...Well. In my defense, I really haven't encountered the term outside the context of either mockery of it, or the occasional Youtube lecture/mockery video made by left-leaning individuals like Innuendostudios or Hbomberguy. I didn't think this was about mental health, just people who could get really obsessive with a topic and end up posting a storm on Tumblr or Twitter, or theoretically victims of rape or abuse that could have trauma flashbacks recalling their experience from the language used or events related in a video or post.

    Heck, I've personally been in a bunch of respit programs/"support groups" before, even lived in a couple of long-term care group homes until I was too old for my mother to keep me in them. The people I had to live with certainly had their "triggers", but I can vaguely recall that I might've had my own term for when they...well, expressed their disorders. I don't think it was "trigger", though. Maybe something like "fixation" or "stigma/stigmata". And if the support workers had a term for them, I didn't know it.
     
    Delphisage said:
    ...Well. In my defense, I really haven't encountered the term outside the context of either mockery of it, or the occasional Youtube lecture/mockery video made by left-leaning individuals like Innuendostudios or Hbomberguy. I didn't think this was about mental health, just people who could get really obsessive with a topic and end up posting a storm on Tumblr or Twitter, or theoretically victims of rape or abuse that could have trauma flashbacks recalling their experience from the language used or events related in a video or post.

    Heck, I've personally been in a bunch of respit programs/"support groups" before, even lived in a couple of long-term care group homes until I was too old for my mother to keep me in them. The people I had to live with certainly had their "triggers", but I can vaguely recall that I might've had my own term for when they...well, expressed their disorders. I don't think it was "trigger", though. Maybe something like "fixation" or "stigma/stigmata". And if the support workers had a term for them, I didn't know it.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I'm a little surprised you didn't explain it this way first s it does contextualize a lot. Anyway, while that was the intended use of the term my understanding is that it had been a fairly recent and once people outside those groups found out about it, certain individuals quickly embraced it as a term of mockery, IE the "Lol, triggered, leftists snowflakes, soy boys, LOL!" people which actually led to the term being used less in some cases by those it was initially meant for. A particular anecdote that sticks with me is someone from a support group self c encoring themselves and getting really embarrassed after using the term trigger and having to drag out their explanation because of the concocted bias against the term.
     
    Psyga315 said:
    It's not really a cycle of abuse. It's a cycle, yes, but I wouldn't call it abuse.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    When Emerald expresses disagreement with Cinder, Cinder's response is to slap her into submission.

    Given Cinder seems to model herself after Salem who is, admittedly more skilled and controlled than her, but still inclined to choke someone just for speaking out of turn and can be extremely intimidating even with her 'favorite' Cinder and the fact we have only seen a little of their relationship, I would argue there is good reason to think Salem abused Cinder, Cinder abused Emerald, and Emerald will have a choice whether to continue the cycle or escape and break it.
     
    Psyga315 said:
    One scene.

    If that's the case, the cycle of abuse is larger on Blake because she slapped Sun twice... Actually four times, but in two scenes.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Emphasis tends to be important, as does the characters involved, or more to the point, context. Cinder holds tons of power over Emerald, Emerald voiced disagreement and got slapped and cowed into submission.

    Sun repeatedly invaded Blake's privacy, space and home to the point of breaking stuff all of his own volition, after she has been traumatized and is trying to recover and given he continues to argue with her afterwards, clearly isn't particularly hurt or intimidated.

    There's a vast gulf between someone with all the power slapping someone for disagreeing with them to cow them into submission or cos they can't control their temper, and someone who is traumatized lashing out against someone who keeps pushing in on them when they are vulnerable or scared and whom they have no power over and who can leave whenever they feel like it.

    Honestly even comparing the two feels really gross to me and more or less like actively ignoring any and all context and the inherent nature of abusive relationships.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top