Jump to content

Kevin Owens

Premier Retired Staff
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,031

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Kevin Owens

  2. Kevin Owens
    No WWE talent becomes a legend on their own. Every man's heart one day beats its final beat. His lungs breathe their final breath. And if what that man did in his life makes the blood pulse through the body of others and makes them bleed deeper in others something larger than life, then his essence, and his spirit will be immortalized by the story tellers, by the loyalty, by the memory of those who honor him and make the running the man did live forever. You are the legend makers of ultimate warrior. In the back, I see many potential legends, some with in their Warrior spirits. And you will do the same for them. You will decide if they will live with passion and intensity, so much so that you will tell your stories and make them legends as well. I am Ultimate Warrior. You are the ultimate warrior fans. And the spirit of Ultimate Warrior will run forever.
  3. Kevin Owens

    DEMOCRACY

    By Kevin Owens,

    There is but one god that that is the Dome Fossil. Flareon is his prophet. All hail our new democratic overlords. All hail the Dome Fossil which will lead us to victory.
     
    Believe in that. Believe in the Dome Fossil.
     
  4. Kevin Owens

    Blog Entries

    By Kevin Owens,

    Alright, hey, check this out.
     
    I have an issue I want to talk about. Maybe it's something that hasn't come up recently. Maybe it's something that the mods are pulling their hair out over and telling people to let it drop. Whatever the issue is, it's like a live wire. You simply mention it and people are at each others throats. People don't know this mainly because it doesn't get mentioned often, but dropping a bombshell issue like that could feasibly considered trolling. But it won't stop me. I'll post this entry no matter what.
     
    Now I need to decide on a modus operandi. Maybe I'll be passive aggressive. Delicately, or perhaps not so delicately, skirting around the issue. Make a vague reference to it. "The recent hot topic on BZP is..." or perhaps if you wanted to be more direct you could say "The content in people's signatures..." or "The Staff on BZP are..." Go ahead. Fill in the blanks. But perhaps I'll be more brash. Drop the passive and skip right to the aggressive. Name drop. Skip words like 'offensive' and go straight to more potent ones like 'disgust.' I dunno, I'm just making this up as I go along.
     
    But whoa! Slow up Daniel-San. Before you can go on the offensive, you need to learn balance. Good balance, good troll entry. Bad balance, pack up and go home. Your balance will be in your topic of choice. You pick a good topic, you'll be sure to troll people. Bad topic, and either no one will bite or the staff will be on you so fast you'll wonder where your proto went. Here are some of the classic issues. Take heed. While potent, these topics have been cycled through so often that most staff will recognize them for what they are. Use at your own risk. The common issues include: sexuality, sexism, the legitimacy of certain kinds of art and music, bullies, anime, and the impact of neo-western cultural imperialism on Japan.
     
    But wait, there's more. I'm like the Billy Mays of bad blog entries, and I'm here to tell you about our latest offer. Call now, and I'll throw in my "Lock It And Drop It" mini-booklet absolutely free, just pay separate shipping and handling. The 'Lock It And Drop It" technique is your crane kick. If you can do it right, there's no defense. It's the ultimate passive aggressive method. In this informative booklet, I'll give you my fool proof guide on how to lock entries and then drop 'em into the blogs for maximum effectiveness.
     
    Now then, so you've got your perfectly crafted post, topic, or blog entry. Perfectly designed to incite the most trouble. One post. One flame war. Before you hit that post button, there's one last step you need to do. It's the most crucial one, and if you goof this one up then you're done for. Here's what you do.
     
    You move your cursor over to the little red x in the top right hand corner of your browser and click it. Exit out, and don't post it. Trust me, your proto will thank you later. So will the staff.
     
    I thought about locking it as per the 'Lock It And Drop It' technique, but I figure I could get some more out of this by keeping it open and answering questions in a vague, mysterious, and passive aggressive manner that will infuriate just about everyone.
     
    Rebumping this back up to the top with a new addendum: Perhaps you see the heated topic you just posted spiraling out of control. People are calling you out for being wrong! They're being respectful in doing so! They're intelligently discussing their points. You decide to retroactively lock the post so that it stops. After all, you never really intended to cause a 'fight.' You never intended to be called out for your hurtful words. You just want to take it all back so that way people don't call you 'hurtful' things.
     
    Discussion is allowed and encouraged on BZPower. Hate and intolerance is not.
     

  10. Kevin Owens
    Alright. Normally even my most serious of entries contain a healthy amount of depreciating humor that I'm just as eager to use on myself as I am on those around me. There's very little I approach without a quick wit. It's something of a coping mechanism that I use to deal with the world I find myself in. We all have to do what we have to do to survive, and I'm the same.
     
    Because I'm approaching this without making a joke or an obscure reference that only Smeag or Wrack 'n' Ruin would get, I hope you all can appreciate just how serious I am about this. It's something I take extremely serious, and I hope all of you can respect that.
     
    In case it isn't blatantly obvious, I am referring to a topic related to sexuality. Specifically I want to talk about BZPower's rules on the subject. While for the most part I've been happy with the ruling, but in the recent months I've become increasingly aware that it is an insidious double standard and one that simply must be done away if BZPower is to maintain its claim as being for equality.
     
    This is a bold claim to be sure, but one that I am positive is demonstrable. The staff has claimed multiple times that sexuality is not a political nor a religious issue. I used to agree with them when it comes to this, and in many ways I still believe that claim. However ideals do not exist in a vacuum even if we want them to. While sexuality should neither be a political nor a religious issue, the sad fact is that sexuality is very much so both a political and a religious issue. To think otherwise would be to deny the reality that we find ourselves in. Sexuality is inexplicitly tied to both religion and politics even though it shouldn't be. My blog entries and the responses therein are a testament to this fact. An attempt to deal with sexuality as anything but a political/religious issue is an attempt doomed to failure. If we want real, permanent change we must accept this fact. To deny it is not only foolish. It is detrimental to progress.
     
    I say it is time for the rules to change. The system is broken. The rules as they stand now do not line up with the virtues espoused and harbored by both the staff and the members. We stand for equality. We stand for the dignity of every single human being, regardless of their beliefs or orientation. If this is true, and I'm sure that we are believe in it, then I must pose this question: why am I being silenced alongside the bigots and the hateful?
     
    There is no mistaking it. That is exactly what is happening. The rules that once kept the floodgates from breaking have become antiquated. They are suppressing those who are already suppressed. I am not allowed to voice events surrounding my rights and liberties. I am not allowed to talk about serious events that have a serious impact about me. Why? Because bigots might raise their voice. Because those who would seek to hate me for who I am would do exactly that. So to prevent them from doing so, I am prevented from talking. If I do wish to talk about these events, I am forced to do so in a manner that skirts around the issue at best and only thinly veils it at worst.
     
    If you don't believe me, consult this entry. What exactly have I done wrong here? People were being supportive and there was no flaming or bigotry. Apparently mentioning the DOMA by name was the reason the entry was closed. Suppose I removed the reference. Suppose I said "Today some big event happened in relation to the GBLT community. I have mixed feelings." I suppose that would be an acceptable substitute in the eyes of the rules, but nothing as changed. It's clearly obvious as to what event I am mentioning, and it won't stop the bigots from coming in and being hateful. It's insulting to both parties to dance around the issue when it's cut and dry what we're really talking about.
     
    In a twisted way I suppose it's a sense of equality. I'm not allowed to talk about serious events in relation to my sexuality, and the bigots aren't either. Then again the idea of silencing a person about their sexuality just because people won't take kindly to it doesn't exactly sit well with me. Mainly because it's erasure. Which is a bad thing.
     
    It's for this reason I left staff a few months ago. At the time the current rules and their implementation didn't sit well with me, but I didn't quite understand why. I knew something was wrong. I didn't know what. Now I have realized the reason. I am being silenced alongside the bigots. Because my sexuality and reveling in progress might upset people. It might cause people to use hateful language. It might cause people to express bigotry.
     
    Anywhere else this would be called victim blaming. On BZP we call this equality.
     
    Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the staff are all monsters who are suppressing me. I was once staff. I've stood in their shoes. I know what it's like. You often have to make the best of an absolutely terrible situation, and it's rarely an easy thing to do. I really do emphasize with them, and they have my sympathies. However my empathy will not prevent me criticizing the really culprit here. The rules are to blame, and they need to be changed in a way that does not silence those who are oppressed.
    If people are going to be bigots in response to my blog post about DOMA, then let them be punished for being bigots. Do not silence me because they might be bigots. Do not ask me to not talk about my sexuality. Do not try to hide behind the veil of 'equality' by silencing both parties. Do not insult me by offering me small, narrow gaps with which I can express my sexuality.
     
    And don't tell me nothing good ever comes out of this. Kakaru stands as a shining example of the good that comes from confronting bigotry head on. He made some offhand remarks like how "My religion doesn't agree with your sexuality but I still like you." I challenged him on it. He changed. Change does happen when you don't silence people because of their sexuality.
     
    My name is Gato, and I'm done putting up with this disgusting double standard.
  12. Kevin Owens
    One one hand I feel as if people are overestimating the impact that the overturning of the Defense of Marriage Act will have. While yes it is rather important and represents a large step forward when it comes to GBLT rights, it also only represents a relatively small drop in the bucket when it comes to equality. Except we're dealing more with an Olympic swimming pool rather than a bucket.The verdict was a bit too narrow for my tastes, but then again anything short of completely legalizing marriage of all sorts would have been in my eyes. I feel it to be difficult to get too excited, knowing that many more harder battles lie ahead of us.
     
    On the other hand, there's still that optimistic side of me that is acting like this while my inner pessimist scowls in a corner.
     
    Tomato tomato.
  17. Kevin Owens
    Cooking with the Comrade: Weaboo Edition
     
    Smeag used to do a thing on his blog where he would post recipes, and it was great. But there was one thing wrong with it: the recipes were occasionally HEALTHY JUNK for SISSIES.
     
    I'm here to compete with food for REAL, RED-BLOODED AMERICANS.
     

     
    Ah yes. Sushi. A Japanese delicacy enjoyed around the world. It’s extraordinarily popular, and some would say that only a true cretin would not enjoy it. You know what I say?
     
    Pump that garbage in another man’s face! Seaweed as the outter wrapping? If I wanted seaweed I would go down to the ocean and stand in the water with my mouth open. Which I wouldn’t. Because it’s stupid to eat seaweed. Rice as the bulk? Who eats rice anyway? Weaboos who can’t stop espousing the virtues of glorious Nippon. Raw fish in the center? Didn’t your mama ever tell you not to eat raw meat? What a horrible idea for a food.
     
    Well never fear. Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto, because you’re cooking with the Comrade now!
     

     
    Rev up that grill, because I am hungry for some meat! Ain’t no raw fish junk in this dish!
     

     
    Awh yeah. All dat meat. Also notice the god tier blue powerade in the background. So good.
     

     
    Fun fact: Bacon is my waifu.
     

     
    I don’t have a problem with bacon. Bacon has a problem with me. We’ll be using this instead of that nasty fish food known as sea weed.
     

     
    Mac and cheese. You know that when you’re cooking with lunar you don’t go for that homemade garbage. You make it straight from the box no questions asked.
     
    Now let’s assemble our meat sushi!
     

     
    Bar-b-Que boneless spare ribs in the center for the standard affair. My mouth is already watering.
     

     
    For those of you who want a little more kick here’s some with buffalo chicken in the center.
     

     
    There was supposed to be some here with jumalaya and sausage, but the bacon couldn’t hold out due how to the amazing the idea. Pro tip: If you want to do this yourself make sure to use extra bacon.
     

     
    Now look at that. Tell me that doesn’t look better than that weaboo junk I posted at the start. This? This is American.
    Hoo rah!
     
  18. Kevin Owens

    break it down!

    By Kevin Owens,

    The more and more I think about it the more and more I realize that this was pretty much me and Corey during out stint on BZP.
     

     
    Two bros who pushed the envelope and changed BZP forever. Two men who played the game, broke all the rules, and still managed to come out on top. Two bros who bromance transcended to scandalously homoerotic levels, and while we will always claim to be nothing more than brothers you'll always wonder if there isn't something more to it.
     
    Two men who still command respect when they post, not only for their rank but also their prestigious contributions to the forums. We pushed the envelopes. We toed the line. For better or worse, we've left our mark on BZP. While we'll always claim the other as the better half of the combination, together we're too potent to ignore. Corey, the most ELECTRIFYING WOMAN IN BLOGGING ENTERTAINMENT. Gato, the most... IDK. I've never done anything compared to him, but my over inflated ego demands that I be recognized as amazing.
     
    The point is, we're both amazing, but Corey moreso than I.
  21. Kevin Owens
    Alternative Title: Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Blog Something Controversial....
     
    Recently on website I frequent for Magic: The Gathering articles there was a particularly interesting one concerning the prevalence of homophobic rhetoric that occasionally arises among players. While the article itself was fairly textbook material (e.g. homophobia is bad. stop using words like 'gay' in a derogatory manner), the comments revealed just why the article was necessary. Dozens of people chimed in saying that they shouldn't be asked to stop using homophobic slurs. In their eyes the problem wasn't with them. It was with others. They should not be offended.
     
    Their assertion was laughable in my eyes. It seemed so inherently wrong to me that nobody should even make the effort of reproaching them. But nonetheless it simply must be asked. If someone is saying something that is offensive to me, is it my fault for being offended? Should the person be asked to stop, or should I get over it?
     
    It's worth noting that I'll be using homophobia as a blanket all inclusive term. Really this can be applied to all hate speech ranging from homophobia to racism to transphobia to any other sort of hateful language directed at a group of people for reasons outside of their control.
     
    The question sounds silly. Obviously the person being offensive is in the wrong and should stop. The person being offended is innocent and should not be forced to do anything. The offender is making the other person uncomfortable with their words. The burden of action lies on the offender, and the required action is to cease and desist. There is no other option.
     
    But as obvious as the answer is, it is not simply enough. It is not enough to know the answer. Of utmost importance is to understand the why of the answer. Just why is it wrong? Why must the offender be forced to change or at the very least stop? The journey is just as important as the destination, and the path reveals several truths.
     
    Perhaps the most important is that words have power. There is the old adage that the pen is mightier than the sword, but the impact of the truth is so much more than just a pithy statement. Words have a power that is hard to grasp. When used wrongly they can be devastating. As a bisexual, I cannot begin to comprehend just how terrible homophobic rhetoric has been to me. Hate speech has a hard to overstate negative effect to those who come in contact with it.
     
    It is for this reason that homophobic language must not only be avoided but actively engaged when encountered. By using homophobic language one hurts the homosexual person. In using those kinds of words you are essentially saying that being a homosexual is a bad thing. You are using the label of homosexuality in a negative sense, and therefore equivocating it to something wrong. In doing so you are demeaning homosexuals across the globe, and nobody should be put in a negative light because of something they are and can't control. However the crime is far greater than that. Every time somebody calls something gay they are perpetuating a culture of hate. They are proliferating a culture that says that it is not okay to be who you are. Whoever supports this kind of society is only fooling themselves into thinking that it is a good one.
     
    Now returning to the argument at hand, the offender offers a new counterpoint. While it is true that words have power, the question must be asked where do words get their powers? It is readily apparent that words are not self sufficient on their own. As a man created tool they receive their power from men. But from which catergory of people do the words receive their power, or meaning? Is it the offender or the offended?
     
    The offender would claim that the offended is giving the words a power that they did not originally intend. When they say something like, "Wow Thragtusk is so overpowered it's gay." they're not using gay to refer to homosexuality as a negative thing. They're just expressing their hate for Thragtusk by essentially calling it dumb. They're not trying to make homosexuality to be a bad thing. After all, they're all for the homosexuals and what have you. The offended just need to get off their high horse and not be offended and taking their words the wrong way.
     
    There are of course several problems that arise with this, and I think now would be a grand time to go off on something of a rabbit trail on this subject. I am loathe to speak of it for numerous reasons, but something must be said of privilege. Privilege is a kind of prejudice, but it is a much more subtle one. Where as discrimination is an extremely overt form of prejudice, privilege is a much more covert one. Essentially heterosexuals have the privilege of not having experienced the hate directed towards homosexuals. Rather than viewing themselves in an advantaged position that must be maintained at the expense of others, privilege dictates the experience of the heterosexual is the norm that every does and should experience.
     
    It is this privilege that in my eyes allows the continual abuse of homosexual labels in a negative light. They simply don't and can't even begin to comprehend the pain that comes along with the culture of hate that they inadvertently perpetrate. It's not that I can try to explain it to them by using the word heterosexuality as a synonym for a negative word in popular discourse. While they might get an inkling, they can't understand the baggage that goes along with centuries upon centuries of hate and discrimination that goes along with being a homosexual.
     
    It is when someone is told not to use words like gay in a negative light and they counter by placing the blame on the homosexual that they pass from the realm of willful ignorance and into the realm of hateful bigotry. They are no longer unknowingly perpetuating the hate culture. They have been informed of how it is wrong and why. They then choose not to change their ways and perhaps shed part of the blinder of privilege. They choose to desperately cling to what they have said at the expense of others. It is a crime of the gravest sort. Perhaps unintentionally putting an entire group of people down for the sake of expressing a passing remark of dislike on an object is forgivable. I find myself much less forgiving if the crime is intentional.
     
    And of course it all comes down to why. Why does this matter? Why am I choosing to write this blog entry rather than grinding some more MTG or playing some video games? It matters because the offender is not simply being offensive. Whether knowingly or not the offender is taking away my ability to identify myself. I identify as bisexual, and telling me that I am not allowed to be offended by homophobia, that I need to grow up, that I am too thin skinned, or that I just need to get over it is beyond absurd. The fact that such an opinion is widespread and so accepted as to be the norm is completely baffling to me.
     
    Ironically at the risk of completely invalidating everything I have just typed, it is up to me to rise above the hate. I cannot simply wade in self loathing for my entire life. As much as I like I cannot dwell on self pity, cursing and shaking my fist towards the sky as I condemn the homophobic. Every day I must rise and enter once again into a world that not only loathes be but seeks to oppress me at every turn. I work with people who wish to take away my rights. I talk with people who can't understand the pain I feel. I attempt to reason with those who see differently and will never admit that their homophobia is doing disastrous things. I do it not because I enjoy it or I want to. I do it because there is no other option available to me.
     
    Sometimes just forcing myself out of bed is the hardest part of my day, and one day I hope to wake to a world that accepts me for who I am.
  24. Kevin Owens
    This was originally an entry I wanted to make about a week ago, but considering how heated things were around my entry about my bisexuality and my struggles with it I decided not to. Hopefully with tempers tempered (ha ha ha I made a funny), this won't result in the negative kneejerk reaction that led to the trouble of the last entry. At least that's what I'm hoping.
     
    In light of a recent blog post I believe this needs to be seen again for those who possibly missed it.
     
    Now then! This is actually something I have some authority to talk about. In about four months from now I'm going to graduate from school with my minor being the attic Greek language. The two words that we get from homophobia, homos and phobos, are attic Greek in orgin! Thus you can know that I didn't just read wikipedia and copy and pasted some words and called it a day. I'm pretty much a certified expert on this subject.
     
    Now then onto the main subject of this entry and that is my issue with how people have been trying to redefine homophobia. They root of their argument takes place in the definition of phobia part of homophobia. They say that phobia comes from the greek word of phobos, which literally means fear. They claim that they're not afraid of homosexuality, and therefore they are not homophobic. I would certainly hope that they're not afraid of homosexuals. We're not some sort of rabid people with no control over their id. We don't riot in the streets or attack people or commit crimes. For the most part we're just ordinary people like the majority of the population. We have jobs. We pay taxes. We love our significant others.
     
    I'd lack to unpack the word phobos a bit more just a bit more if only for completionists sake. The word phobos just doesn't refer to a sort of rational fear. phobos refers to such an overpowering fear that it completely dominates everything else. It's the kind of fear that causes flight. A more apt translation would be terror or panic. Phobos is a fear so overpowering that there is no other room for any emotion.
     
    The more you know.
     
    Now then so far so good. People say they aren't homophobic because they don't fear homosexuals. However if there is one thing that I cannot stand it is a sort of dastardly ragamuffin trained in the most basics of logical thought and proceed to pilfer and wriggle certain parts of arguments until they can get things to mean what they want. In the context of this post, I'm referring to people who are accused of being homophobic but then say that they're not because they're not afraid of homosexuals. To put the exchange in a more stock form, we could say the following.
     
    "I accuse you of being X. You respond by saying that you're not X because of Y."
     
    This is of course simple logic. Point and counter point. However the responders argument only stands if Y is true and is sufficient to counter the claim of being X. Getting back to the argument at hand, the responder is only not homophobic if homophobia refers to the fear of homosexuals and they do not fear homosexuals. Simple enough, right?
     
    Not quite. The problem comes down to a difference of definitions. The accused response holds an interesting implication in that they are claiming my definition of homophobia is wrong. It is obviously intended in my statement that I don't mean homophobia to mean a hatred of homosexuals. They counter that homophobia doesn't mean a hatred but rather a fear of homosexuals. They back up this claim by refering to the roots of homophobia. phobos means fear. Therefore homophobia refers to a fear rather than a hatred. Alas! Alas! I am vanquished. Woe is me.
     
    But I am not quite finished yet. I take offense to their redefinition of homophobia. I say that they are not allowed to pick and choose which words to translate literraly, especially within the context of the same word! I say that if they must translate homos literally to back up their counter, I will force them to translate homos literally as well. Homos means same. It's where we get words like homogenous. Thus then they must literally be saying that they are not afraid of things that are similar. Fair enough. I will conceed that they are not afraid of things that are similar. My original point of them spouting homophobic rhetoric still stands.
     
    I am now realizing how long this blog entry is, but I have not yet begun to fight!
     
    On a less technical level, the meaning of words often change. Language is a fluid, trecherous animal that if you do not watch your words you might be saying the complete opposite of what you say. Thus I might contend that at one point if homophobia literally refered to the fear of homosexuals, which I might add that at one point it did not, it doesn't mean that now. When I use the word homophobia and you hear it in public discourse, it is in reference to the hate of homosexuals. When I call someone homophobic I am saying that on some level at least they have a dislike of homosexuals. This dislike or hate is incredibly dangerous and leads to damaging things being said that stay with people for as long as they live. Even something as simple as calling a situation or event 'gay' has start to grow wearisome to me. The equivocation with something I am in a negative manner is rather mean spirited at best and potentially deadly at worst.
     
    But I digress. The discussion on the damaging aspects of homophobia can be covered at another time.
     
    Returning once again to the argument at hand, it's worth noting that the actions of the accused are rather illogical. I claim that they are homophobic (i.e. that they hate homosexuals), but they counter that my definition of homophobia is wrong and therefore they are not homophobic. They seek to attack the technical aspect of my argument. They seek to prove me wrong by assaulting the very definitions that they use. If they are not homophobic by definition, then they have won. They are right. I am wrong.
     
    Take a second and ask yourself this question. If they are right, what has essentially changed?
     
    The correct answer is nothing. Absolutely nothing has changed at all. Let us assume I cede the point. I admit defeat. Homophobia does mean the fear of homosexuals. My use of the term was wrong, and I do apologize for the misnomer. Yet at no point has my underlying point been addressed. I have accused them of a hatred of homosexuals, and my point essentially still stands. They have not attempted to counter it and it is still valid as it has not even withstood a semblance of assualt. I conceed that homophobia means fear of homosexuals, but I still stand by my claim that the person is acting in a way that betrays their hatred of homosexuality.
     
    It begins to dawn on you that everything you have read has proved to be a colossal waste of time.
     
    Any logical objections to my logic are more than welcome to take place in the comments. Irrational homophobia is not welcome and will be reported.
  25. Kevin Owens

    Smartphones

    By Kevin Owens,

    My friend recently picked up the new iPhone. He asked me if he had any apps I wanted to recommend.
     
    I told him that there's this really neat app called Droid that Google makes.
     
    FYI I'm a horrible person.
×
×
  • Create New...