GayGamer.net has a lot to answer for

[-Samurai-]

Someone being offended by something isn't a good enough reason to do away with the thing that offends them. Then we'd live in an empty universe, because everything offends someone.

But some things are more offensive than others. Everything isn't black and white. Being offended by hate speech isn't on the same level as being offended by clowns.

But that's not true at all. As this thread shows, the level of offensiveness varies from person to person. You can't simply declare something offensive and call it a day. Depending on who you ask, it may be a big deal, a small one, or non-existent.

And yes, if something offends enough people, that's a perfectly good reason to do away with that thing.

Then nothing in this universe would exist. Some people are offended by colors. Other are offended by certain clothing. I guarantee you there is at least 1 person in the world that finds my shirt offensive because it has a pirate flag on the back(Myrtle Beach vacation shirt).

When it comes to offending someone, you can't cater to everyone. It isn't a physical possibility.

What it comes down to is that it's far easier and far more reasonable for you to stop using slurs and hate speech than it is for so many people to STOP being offended by it.

I disagree. I don't think people should stop being who they are in either circumstance.

Some people use slurs and racial comments because they genuinely believe what they're saying, and that's how they really feel. Who are we to ask them to change, when we aren't willing to change to accept them for who they are?

All this comes down to is personal opinion, anyway.

 

[Something Amyss]

He's being politically correct, of course he as to perceive everything as offensive.

Yeah, because gays would have no other use to take issue with the use of "gay" being tossed around.

 

[BlueInkAlchemist]

Well thats not really right though. Language only works if it has set social factors behind it's usage. there is a reason why we have various levels of discourse in society.

Theres a language we use at work (possibly entirely made up by jargon terminology others wouldn't understand) and a language we use in academic circles (once again, jargon that others might nmot understand), and a language we use in social circles.

But we must always take into account that no matter what our intentions are, we may offend another if we do not use or terminology effectively. We must also accept that there has to be naturally some rationalkity behind the very words we use and the context of which they were born from.

Grace is a professional working within a media company that designs products for public consumption. Whilst I understandt hat one should have freedom of speech (therefore make characters in games tht might be seen as offensive caricateurs of a different time and place) but it must also be expected that his chosen discourse must be chosen wisely.

There is meaning, both inherent and literal, in words. It has to be in order for them to make sense. I think it's more than apt that people be offended that a person who should be sympathetic enough not to use 'gay' as a derogative teminology chose not to.

Frankly it's immature, unprofessional and something that people should aspire to raise themselves above.

I don't disagree with you, and I think Grace did the right thing in rendering an apology. It's entirely possible a joke made with the intent of getting everybody to laugh might offend someone, and if it does raise ire or negative feelings it should be addressed tactfully and with respect. Grace did that.

I also agree that people in general and gamers in particular should aspire to rise above derogatory and pejorative language especially when it comes to serious and especially professional discussion. I know for a fact I might fall short of that aspiration, especially when I'm in a comfortable environment among friends. That doesn't mean the effort shouldn't be made.

I guess my point is that more people should be working to adhere to Wheaton's First Law — "Don't be a dick."

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

And yes, if something offends enough people, that's a perfectly good reason to do away with that thing.

Then nothing in this universe would exist. Some people are offended by colors. Other are offended by certain clothing. I guarantee you there is at least 1 person in the world that finds my shirt offensive because it has a pirate flag on the back(Myrtle Beach vacation shirt).

Your response is like the exact opposite of what I said.

I said if ENOUGH people are offended, not if ANY people. My point was that something small that only offends a couple people certainly shouldn't be done away with, but something big that offends a LOT of people should. And dismiss it all you want, even slurs as seemingly innocent as "gay" offend "enough" people.

It's not even the word itself, it's the fact that so many people can just carelessly use it in a derogatory way. As has been said, the idea is intent. But whether you're using it because you want to offend people, or you're completely oblivious (or worse, just don't care) that people will be offended, either way it's a problem.

Again, if talking like that is "who you are", the problem is you, and it's kind of ridiculous to demand that everyone else cater to your childishness just because you want to speak without thinking.

 

[Still Life]

Given the amount of flippant and overt homophobia that can be found in the 'gaming' community, I think it's appropriate that a producer for a big title who makes a 'dick' call gets pulled up for it. I personally don't think that the matter itself is a big deal, but the public apology sets a positive precedent for those who need to a bit of guidance with their moral compass, and is a sign that discrimination against homosexuals is unacceptable in a professional industry.

Perhaps some of those who think GayGamer.net have something to answer for, should take a good long look at themselves.

 

[Tanis]

He's being politically correct, of course he as to perceive everything as offensive.

Yeah, because gays would have no other use to take issue with the use of "gay" being tossed around.

Well, Master Chief...him and that that convent soldier from H2.
I'm just sayin', bo-chika-wow-wow.

 

[Broken Boy]

So...

If gay people wish to not be segregated and want to be treated on an equal level to anyone else, why do they need to have their own specified gamer site only for them?

I was not even going to post in this tread till I came across this but now I feel compelled to do so.

I know it may be hard for most heterosexual people to understand that we (L.G.B.T) would need a place just for us. But everyone no matter what niche they may fit into needs a place they can feel safe expressing their opinions. And most places we are hated & thought of as deviants so in order to avoid such things we make our own places & sites to go to not to face the hate we receive from still a good majority of the world. I'm sure that when we receive all the rights & liberties that heterosexual people have & don't have to be afraid to reveal ourselves then we will be very glad to join the rest of the populous. I try not to speak for the rest of the L.G.B.T community but this is just how I feel.

This man better sums up what I am trying to say.

 

[Ekonk]

Meh, GayGamer.net has the right to be upset, and to a degree it's understandable, but It's really not that big of deal. Besides that Grace guy is right! I'm tired of all these mother fracking space marines in my mother fracking games!!!

It's still no reason to use 'gay' as a pejorative word. People call it harmless but they need to shut the fuck up. It may be mostly harmless (lol), but it still shows the general mentality concerning homosexuals. Which is "it's okay to use as an insult". Which means "it's bad".

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Guys, he was using it to mean homosexual.

Then as I already said, this is a different kind of problem, because there aren't any genuinely gay space marines (as someone pointed out, Mass Effect 2 actually prohibits this!). Speculating on someone's sexuality by labeling arguably "suspicious" behavior isn't really all that much better.

Yes, there's more than a couple "space marine" games, and almost none of them are even remotely homoerotic. So at best, his comment expresses an ignorant of either homosexual "behavior" or of the space marine genre, or more likely both.

 

[Still Life]

So...

This man better sums up what I am trying to say.

Some good points in that video.

 

[Der Kommissar]

Everybody's too damn sensitive these days. We all need to take a chill pill and have relaxing day by the pool.

The thing is, today there's a chance to get filthy famous and rich just by feigning "hurt". No one will leave that unused.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

What a drama queen. Gay people crying and getting offended at something so trivial makes me not like gay people.

So one gay guy getting over a guy describing something he doesn't like with a word that defines them makes you hate all gay people?

You have a problem.

 

[Iwata]

I do hate this overly-sensitive PC bullshit...

 

[-Samurai-]

And yes, if something offends enough people, that's a perfectly good reason to do away with that thing.

Then nothing in this universe would exist. Some people are offended by colors. Other are offended by certain clothing. I guarantee you there is at least 1 person in the world that finds my shirt offensive because it has a pirate flag on the back(Myrtle Beach vacation shirt).

Your response is like the exact opposite of what I said.

I said if ENOUGH people are offended, not if ANY people. My point was that something small that only offends a couple people certainly shouldn't be done away with, but something big that offends a LOT of people should. And dismiss it all you want, even slurs as seemingly innocent as "gay" offend "enough" people.

It's not even the word itself, it's the fact that so many people can just carelessly use it in a derogatory way. As has been said, the idea is intent. But whether you're using it because you want to offend people, or you're completely oblivious (or worse, just don't care) that people will be offended, either way it's a problem.

But how many people is "enough"? It has to be every person in the world, or it isn't enough.

Again, if talking like that is "who you are", the problem is you, and it's kind of ridiculous to demand that everyone else cater to your childishness just because you want to speak without thinking.

Yet right now, you're demanding that everyone cater to you. And that isn't just as ridiculous?

What you're saying is; "Everyone that doesn't agree with me, stop being who you are, because who you are is wrong. Be me. I'm the correct person to be."

Well you are wrong. You are the problem because you can't just let people be who they are. They aren't trying to change you.

The sooner you accept the fact that no-one in the entire universe is exactly like you, the better off you'll be. Be who you are, and stop trying to change everyone else. What you find socially acceptable isn't right, and it isn't wrong. It's simply what you find acceptable.

And with that, I'm going to lunch.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

And with that, I'm going to lunch.

So I hate to belabor this point, but by your logic, it's perfectly acceptable to go into a black neighborhood and start tossing around the N-word? And they should just accept you for "who you are"?

Right. Your logic isn't broken or flawed at all.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Well thats not really right though. Language only works if it has set social factors behind it's usage. there is a reason why we have various levels of discourse in society.

Theres a language we use at work (possibly entirely made up by jargon terminology others wouldn't understand) and a language we use in academic circles (once again, jargon that others might nmot understand), and a language we use in social circles.

But we must always take into account that no matter what our intentions are, we may offend another if we do not use or terminology effectively. We must also accept that there has to be naturally some rationalkity behind the very words we use and the context of which they were born from.

Grace is a professional working within a media company that designs products for public consumption. Whilst I understandt hat one should have freedom of speech (therefore make characters in games tht might be seen as offensive caricateurs of a different time and place) but it must also be expected that his chosen discourse must be chosen wisely.

There is meaning, both inherent and literal, in words. It has to be in order for them to make sense. I think it's more than apt that people be offended that a person who should be sympathetic enough not to use 'gay' as a derogative teminology chose not to.

Frankly it's immature, unprofessional and something that people should aspire to raise themselves above.

I don't disagree with you, and I think Grace did the right thing in rendering an apology. It's entirely possible a joke made with the intent of getting everybody to laugh might offend someone, and if it does raise ire or negative feelings it should be addressed tactfully and with respect. Grace did that.

I also agree that people in general and gamers in particular should aspire to rise above derogatory and pejorative language especially when it comes to serious and especially professional discussion. I know for a fact I might fall short of that aspiration, especially when I'm in a comfortable environment among friends. That doesn't mean the effort shouldn't be made.

I guess my point is that more people should be working to adhere to Wheaton's First Law ? "Don't be a dick."

Maybe ... point is I managed to grow up and stop using "Stop being a Jew", or "Downie" or a myriad of idiotic, childish and insensitive derogatory terminology as per pertaining to race, religion, sexuality or health problems. I expect nothing less of others.

If you can't take responsibility for what you say, then you're not much of a person are you? And I don't buy the whole "hey ... my family was backwards" bullshit. Not in this modern world where somebody can communicate with someone else across the other side of the planet instantly and be exposed to all sorts of cultural idiosyncracies without ever leaving the computer.

Besides, as I said before, there's better words that you can supplement a veiled homophobic (whether intentional or not) remark. "That's bullshit", "This is fucked up", all socially acceptable amidst friends and family.

So why don't people use them? No ... they actively choose to use 'gay' as a derogative terminology. Why? Is it somehow better than 'bullshit'? I also contend that as someone who actually associates within the GLBt community (in Australia atleast) that I do not actually meet people who say 'That's gay' (as an insult) barring idiots.

...That much I have identified ... people who tend to use it are likely to be 40 points of IQ below the national average <.<

 

[Baneat]

I agree.

Nothing is "just offensive"

Nothing is simply defined. I don't give a shit about either dictionary definition, it's not relevant. He didn't have malicious intent, there is no issue here.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Maybe I'm ignorant here, but how is making a website called "gaygamer" not some kind of plea for attention.
How is your sexual orientation in ANYWAY tied to your gaming. That's like making a website called "christian gamer", or "vegetarian gamer".

Sigh. Okay, first, calling it "GayGamer" is, in a way, a "plea for attention": attention from other gay gamers. It's the same reason you name ANYTHING with a very obvious name. So that people who see the name know what it's about. You seem to be under the impression that it's named that way to get YOUR attention. It's not.

Second, why should sexual orientation be exclusive of gaming interest? Again, and I can't believe I have to keep explaining this to people, it's a website for gamers who are gay. It's a site for people with specific interests, interests which are more specific than those at an ordinary gaming or gay site.

There absolutely are sites for christian gamers, though I'm much less certain about vegetarian gamers. Vegetarians are a pretty bad example anyway, because that's not nearly as closely tied to one's personality as religion or sexual preference.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

Oh no! people are offended! Whatever shall they do? It's not like it's bad you know. You won't get offended and wake up in the morning with leprosy. This isn't helping the 'gay people are effeminate pansies' stereotype much.