Smite Dev Removes "Offensive" Goddess From Website
- Thread starter Sarah LeBoeuf
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So I don't believe this is really a freedoms issue from either side. However, it does seem incredibly stupid. I mean, the game developers are making a bad game with tasteless use of religious imagery. This is just a sad endeavor. Of course, the religious hype over this is just as bad. It's just a tasteless use of religious imagery. By making an uproar, they've given the game vastly more attention than it would have garnered on its own. I would never have seen anything about this game had the religious types not had a hissy fit over it.
When I say it's a game that shouldn't be made I don't mean in legal terms, I'm saying it's a stupid idea and I perfectly understand why it's upset people. Chances are this game is not being made by people who know much about Hinduism so Kali can be replaced with no effort and with no effect on the game as a whole so why not do it?Rastelin said:
War Goddesses nobody cares about anymore - Athena, Minerva, Ishtar, Andraste, Sekhmet
Goddesses related to fighting - Artemis, almost all of the female Norse pantheon, Nike, Morrigan
From what I remember Sekhmet especially has a strong parallel with Kali, both of them becoming so out of control the other members of their pantheon unite against them and both of them being heavily involved with the end of the world.
Given that most of Tanis' posts on this particular subject appear to have been grossly overstating religious zealotry in general, I don't believe he was. Furthermore, I've seen the Islamic and Hindu faiths being confused for one another quite a few times. One can never be certain.catalyst8 said:
As a Pagan, I've got kind of a twofold reaction to this.
On one hand, I'm thinking "suck it up". As several people have pointed out with varying degrees of obnoxiousness (no, our gods aren't "dead", and it doesn't matter how many worshippers they have, although I will say that Neo-Pagan religions are some of the fastest-growing religions in the world right now), our gods show up in fiction ALL THE TIME. Generally Pagans meet this with either eye-rolling or amusement-- after all, quite a few Heathens (followers of Norse and Germanic religions) saw Thor, and it generated a lot of really interesting discussion of Heimdall. Plus, compared to what people are saying about Persona, this doesn't seem that bad.
On the other hand, though, there really is a huge and offensive double-standard when it comes to things like this that goes something like this: Abrahamic deity figures are off-limits, and for those who really adore courting controversy, they are be depicted positively (even South Park didn't pick on Jesus *that* much). Everyone else's gods, particularly gods of small religions or gods whose worshippers are primarily not white? Fair game, use however you like. And that's really not okay.
The only counter-example I can come up with is Piss Christ, while I can think of tons that go the other way. So my opinion is that it would be fine *if* the double-standard ended. Start using YHVH/Jehovah or Jesus as cluelessly as you use everyone else's deities and we can teach the Christians a few lessons in how to roll your eyes.
On one hand, I'm thinking "suck it up". As several people have pointed out with varying degrees of obnoxiousness (no, our gods aren't "dead", and it doesn't matter how many worshippers they have, although I will say that Neo-Pagan religions are some of the fastest-growing religions in the world right now), our gods show up in fiction ALL THE TIME. Generally Pagans meet this with either eye-rolling or amusement-- after all, quite a few Heathens (followers of Norse and Germanic religions) saw Thor, and it generated a lot of really interesting discussion of Heimdall. Plus, compared to what people are saying about Persona, this doesn't seem that bad.
On the other hand, though, there really is a huge and offensive double-standard when it comes to things like this that goes something like this: Abrahamic deity figures are off-limits, and for those who really adore courting controversy, they are be depicted positively (even South Park didn't pick on Jesus *that* much). Everyone else's gods, particularly gods of small religions or gods whose worshippers are primarily not white? Fair game, use however you like. And that's really not okay.
The only counter-example I can come up with is Piss Christ, while I can think of tons that go the other way. So my opinion is that it would be fine *if* the double-standard ended. Start using YHVH/Jehovah or Jesus as cluelessly as you use everyone else's deities and we can teach the Christians a few lessons in how to roll your eyes.
If they just remove it from their website theyhave less balls than removing it entirely. If they removed it entirely then it would show that they actually didnt want to offend people and therefore they would have the balls to respect other's beliefs as they wish to be respected. If they kept it then they would be saying that they wish to exercise their right to freedom of expression and all that tosh (though they arent expressing anything and it has no real value beyond pure entertainment, which is fine, its the principle that they can if they wish). They are clearly just trying to make better PR without actually doing anything, spineless (unless of course they change it soon in some way).
But it still isn't a thing people say, so it doesn't work as a pun. The throat version is both a common usage phrase, and something that can be related to the penis, as per the premise of the joke and how the vernacular WORKS.CrazyCapnMorgan said:
Now, if you want to try and get people to say "don't shove your beliefs up my ass", that's your prerogative, but as vernacular phrase is rather "don't shove your beliefs down my throat" and NOT the former, your attempt at turn of phrase falls flat.
It simply does not work, because you failed to take into account the rules of conversational speech in an attempt to be funny and edgy.
You do know that the Wikipedia image is Kali as depicted by HINDUS?Terramax said:
Offensive? That is the way they depict their OWN goddess. You can't be offended by that! That's like saying your offended for the Christians that Christians depict their lord and saviour nailed to a cross.
Kali THE DESTROYER is usually depicted with bloodied hands holding swords and/or heads whilst standing on her husband. Oh yeah that's Vishnu her husband she's standing on btw.
See how ridiculous the argument of "I am offended by something" is? It's your own personal opinion about something. The funny thing is you were offended by how the Hindu faith depicts it's own deities.
There is a reason why I do not believe in sharing and/or debts to people. Give someone gum once in school, they're going to expect you to give them one every time.
I'm not going to actively say that doing this will destroy such and such, but I do believe that giving them any leeway will make them expect more in the future. It's a dangerous road to follow, and one that should never be taken without a map.
I'm not going to actively say that doing this will destroy such and such, but I do believe that giving them any leeway will make them expect more in the future. It's a dangerous road to follow, and one that should never be taken without a map.
Take a chill pill dude. I said I thought the wiki picture seemed 'more' offensive of the two.1337mokro said:
And are you suggesting that just because I don't believe in the religion referred to, I can't find a picture offensive, or should have no right to feel emotion or opinion of it?
Well think about what you said.Terramax said:
You said that the way they depict their own gods is more offensive.... compared to what? To how the game depicts them? To your how you think a deity should be depicted? To how you think a woman should be depicted in general? To your principles? You didn't state any of that in your post.
Basically your stance on the whole issue was that you agreed with the Hindus getting pissed about how their God was depicted in a game. Now you say that the way the Hindus depict their gods is more offensive compared to the way it was depicted in the game.
Why do you think it's offensive when that is the way the god was originally intended to be depicted? You don't seem to GET my point here.
You agree with the Hindus that the depiction in the game is offensive to Hindus....but you think the way they depict their own goddess is more offensive than how the game depicts it.
So basically what you are saying here is : "I don't agree with how it is depicted in the game. It is offensive to Hindus and myself. I also don't agree with how the Hindus depict it. It is offensive to Hindus and myself."
You can of course be offended by something. I'm just saying you personally being offended by something carries no weight when that is the only argument, in other words, that is why this whole protest is stupid.
Good on them to do this, if were going to try to not offend people by having Kratos only be violent towards men, then this game can try to not offend over millions of people.
To be fair the shipping company was backed by the rather impressive British military. That and they made some really good strategic alliances with powerful rulers before even calling in the army. India was really brought into the empire until later, and that was pretty much because the British empire had their economy in a stranglehold.DVS BSTrD said:
OT: Isn't Kali kind of a persona non-grata in Hindu theology. Why do they care that much that she shows up in a game? Hell, how did they react when they saw temple of Doom? The whole thing is just a little ridiculous to me. I'd be more pissed that they were using my faith alongside a bunch of defunct religions rather than facing off against other important groups.