Alicorn comments on 'oy, girls on lw, want to get together some time?' - Less Wrong

31 Post author: MBlume 02 October 2009 10:50AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (171)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Alicorn 02 October 2009 03:31:58PM *  3 points [-]

Let me clarify: you think I'm immature, almost constantly in error, you won't explain my failures in enough detail for me to make use of the information even when I ask, you're routinely hostile to me - but it's not like you don't like me or anything. What is it, then? You hold me in the sort of half-fond contempt typically reserved for small, annoying children and animals who don't know any better, or something?

Comment author: Jack 02 October 2009 03:47:01PM *  17 points [-]

Anyone else see sparks here?

// ...sorry. :-)

Comment author: AnlamK 06 October 2009 11:22:02PM *  4 points [-]

This was really funny.

I'm reminded of a Seinfeld scene in which Jerry and Elaine, annoyed at each other, are in a push fight in Jerry's apartment when Kramer pops in, separates them and nonchalantly suggests, "Don't you two see you are in love with each other?". (Note that in the scene, it's obvious Jerry and Elaine are not romantically linked and that's why Kramer's comment is so funny.)

Comment author: SilasBarta 02 October 2009 07:59:15PM 4 points [-]

I am a bit alarmed by the 5 points your post got.

Comment author: Jack 02 October 2009 08:21:49PM 1 point [-]

Its actually like 8 ups at 4 downs at this point. Don't know what that tells us.

Comment author: Alicorn 02 October 2009 03:47:27PM 12 points [-]

...Ew.

Comment author: Jack 02 October 2009 04:05:39PM 6 points [-]

Think Han and Leia, Harry and Sally, Veronica Mars and Logan Echolls, Indiana Jones and that annoying actress from Temple of Doom. I could go on.

I'll stop now, though :-)

Comment author: CronoDAS 03 October 2009 02:14:34AM 3 points [-]

I really doubt we're looking at a case of Slap Slap Kiss here, but teasing is fun.

Comment author: SilasBarta 03 October 2009 03:39:49AM 11 points [-]

I think I'm going to defy all expectation and say: I agree with Alicorn completely on this. (I would have responded directly to Alicorn, but she had told me to leave her alone, and considering the topic, and my position, that would be WAY too much irony.)

I think this trope seriously hinders anti-rape efforts. I'd go into more detail, but given the topic, pretty much anything can be read out of context, so it's best to leave it at that.

Comment author: Alicorn 03 October 2009 02:17:05AM 14 points [-]

This is probably the wrong time to go on about how that trope sexualizes violence and encourages people to think that "no means yes" even given ever-more-stringent values of "no", isn't it?

Comment author: CronoDAS 03 October 2009 05:07:40AM 3 points [-]

I can't speak for everyone, but I wouldn't mind. Rant all you want; this is the Open Thread, after all.

Comment author: Alicorn 03 October 2009 02:15:53PM 3 points [-]

This isn't the open thread. This is "oy, girls on lw, want to get together some time?"

Comment author: Emile 03 October 2009 09:28:40PM 12 points [-]

So the standards here are probably lower than an Open Thread.

Comment author: CronoDAS 03 October 2009 11:36:35PM 1 point [-]

Whoops. :(

Comment author: wedrifid 04 October 2009 08:05:51AM 5 points [-]

I happen to like girls who initiate sex with this sort of challenge. It is a straightforward alternative to the verbal or social challenges that fill the same role more frequently. In fact playing out the dynamics so directly rather than in the verbal world helps prevent any confusion as to whether verbal expressions are a façade to test character or a boundary. 'No' could always mean 'no' and never mean 'I'm not comfortable yet, pull back and continue the mating dance'.

Rape is bad/evil/other/death-spiral. But this trope doesn't encourage rape.