I wonder if it’s the porn industry that caused this shift in definition? They could have originally used it as some sort of gang-rape fantasy. Since it was a fantasy, and the term became so common, it eventually became associated with consentual sex.
I doubt it, I’m 47 and have always heard it as multiple men, one woman… no rape.
Ditto.
I’m 49. I thought it was a reference to gang rape. I base this on Lib’s assertion that only one side would orgasm.
I would have expected orgasms on both sides in a consensual encounter.
Regards,
Shodan
In the light of morning, it looks to me like the quesiton is whether he loathsomely violated one rule of Great Debates (making metaphorical comments about another poster’s sex life), or two rules (that, plus making a disgusting personal insult in calling me and priceguy rapists). As Shodan and Stricker state, it seems from context clear that he was going for the double-header; but others are reading it differently.
Daniel
sigh
I really hate threads like this.
I’ve always taken the view that the rules are there for one major reason - to make this a better message board. Therefore I try to steer clear of anything that comes close to a rule violation. I interpret the rules in the broadest possible way. It seems to me that anything that skates close to thin ice probably makes the board worse and should therefore be avoided. It’s considerate to our host and to other posters.
Increasingly, it seems that I’m the only one who feels this way. Far too often I see the rules scutinized for omissions and triple-checked for loopholes. We wind up with a Pit thread about someone who came thiiiiiiiissss close to breaking the rules, but because the envelope was only streatched to the breaking point and not beyond, nothing is done.
I dunno. Sometimes it makes me think about giving up on this place. But I know that’s never gonna happen. I guess I’ll just have to get used to it.
I agree with you on how the rules should be treated; it behooves one to behave in a non-jerky fashion, so that there’s no danger of breaking them.
What I’m unclear on is how in this case lib managed not to break the rules. The “orgasm” comment seems pretty unambiguous to me, unlike much of his rules-skirting behavior. I can see now that the gang-bang comment stays just on one side of the rules according to some readings.
And frankly, I’m disappointed that he’s getting away with any of it: he started off with a perfectly rational post in Great Debates, and got absolutely nasty when other people began bringing up relevant and polite counterarguments. It’s the starting-off rational part that fooled me, and led me to think that I could have a civilized discussion with him without nasty sexual ad hominems.
Daniel
Oh, I think this case was a pretty clear rules violation myself. But I’ve thought that in the past and then someone came up with a nitpicky argument that I’ve never even considered.
If I was a mod I’d be banning people who tried to get away with that kinda stuff. It’s probably a good thing I’m not a mod. 
Gang-bang is rape OR “pulling a train” – at least it was in my neck of the woods.
I think the key word here is ‘metaphorical’. It didn’t strike me as a direct statement that “you are a rapist”. It was a metaphor.
If you don’t mind a somewhat personal remark, it seems to me from other things you have posted that rape is kind of a hot button with you. We all have hot buttons. Might it be possible that you are reacting more strongly than you might to some other kind of analogy?
Excuse me if I am confusing you with another poster. And I would say that, as hot buttons go, this is an honorable and laudatory one to have, if any can be considered as such. Reacting badly to rape is far from a character flaw.
This does not address whether or not this was a violation of the rules - IANAMod.
FWIW.
Regards,
Shodan
That’ll learn ya. He’s just too unstable for any long-term rational discussion. Somehow he confuses vulgar with witty.
Absolutely–I read it as metaphor, just as if made a comment about how I was fucking pigs I’d think it was intended as a metaphor. That makes neither insult copacetic, IMO.
Right again. Rape is a hot-button issue with me; I’d far rather be called a pigfucker than a rapist. I’d be pissed had he called me a pigfucker (metaphorically) in Great Debates, but not nearly as pissed as I am at what I believe he did call me (despite his dishonest denials later).
Daniel
Left Hand of Dorkness, it was never my intention to call you a rapist. And I believe you know that. It was also never my intention to break a rule or to see how close I could get without going over. I believe you know that, too. My intention was to convey the futility of keeping up with two (and eventually three) of you, who were shooting out posts as fast as you could, demanding answers to complex questions about oddball anarchists in the Land of Doom, and then accusing me of evasion if I missed one. I thought it was an intellectually cheap exercise on your part. The fact that you not only sought to overwhelm me with your sheer volume of babble, but then sought to suppress me from responding altogether by reporting me to a mod leaves me no choice but to consider you to have a predisposition for irrational hostility toward me. It is too bad that our very long relationship of mutal trust and respect has come to this. I know why you’re behaving in this manner: it is because your feelings still are hurt from my comparing you to Satan some time ago. Those hurt feelings drive you to lash out and hurt me, in an effort to make me feel the way you do. That’s why you bring up past bitter experiences, and describe how I, in your view, cycle between Good Lib and Bad Lib. You even suddenly announced recently that, after five years, you don’t want me calling you Daniel anymore, even though I always have, and you sign your posts with the name. Your grudge is beginning to border on the surreal. I already apologized to you for the Satan comment, but you chose not to accept the apology. A person can get hurt just from grinding an axe. You should forgive me, not because you owe me anything, but because forgiveness heals the forgiver. You don’t have to be my friend; just don’t be your own enemy.
Right, you intended to call me a computer programmer. I’ve already read your excuses, and they’re just as dishonest as the rest of your post here is. You’re contemptible, and this isn’t something I can resolve with you.
Daniel
Growing up in Califrogina I always thought a gang-bang was consentual and gang-rape was a form of a gang bang that wasn’t consentual. And Mel Brooks agrees with me and andros.
:rolleyes:
I think Smarmy Guru Liberal is my favorite of his personalities.
I don’t have an opinion on that.
But I think it did look like an overreaction on Lib’s part. It did not appear to be anything beyond what any poster has to expect if he posts much beyond “That Bush sure sux, don’t he?”
Anyway,[old punchline] The pigs are in the truck, and one of them is blowing the horn. [/old punchline]
Regards,
Shodan
They can have my metaphors when they pry them out of my cold, dead hand. (Figuratively speaking)
I believe the acceptance of an apology eases the guilty members ego more than heals the forgiver [sic, old world term]. If you find threads overwhelming you, maybe it’s time to take your 21,063 (wow) posts and call it a day, so to speak. If some posts can frustrate you to a point where you call someone else “Satan,” use “gang bang” and “orgasm” to express your feelings and then rip them for posting irrationally; it’s definitely time to call it a day (in a wider sense). The juvenile nature of some of the words you use smack of AOL chat room mentality.
Er, probably not my place, but as someone who makes her living as writing about sex, erotica, explicitness, fantasies, fetishes and so on, Gang-Bang is a woman who decided she wats to have sex with as many partners in one go as she can handle. It is her CHOICE.
Gang-rape is completely separate because the non-consensual element is involved.
Lisa Sparxxx is the GB world record holder - 919 in one go. And it was ALL consensual.
Probably TMI but, there you have it.
Inky
PS happy to discuss the semantics of this further, off line, if anyone has questions. I don’t want to offend anyone here. I just needed to make that distinction very clear.