Steam User Finds Misogynistic "Joke" Buried in Dead Island Code [UPDATED]

[zombiesinc]

I can understand the company being unimpressed with that going public, and how it could be taken offensively by some, but I can't bring myself to care. You'd think being female might have affected my view on this, but it really hasn't.

 

[SnakeCL]

Whats even funnier is that Logan and Sam B. portrayals are actually much more "sexist". If anything, the female characters are more thought out than the males. Instead its just the men who are idiotic pricks, and the women are always the voice of reason in the cutscenes.

 

[Archer666]

Yeah, fuck that shit. Women's rights? The only right they have is staying in the kitchen. Hatespeech against women? Please, its not my fault they dress like whores and seem to believe they're equal to a man. Ain't that right, buddy?

And yes, video games are so much important than hateful language against another human being.

Um, alright. Your argument is so smary and sarcastic that it offers absolutely nothing of value, and it is a pretty severe personal attack on top of that. But I'll see what I can do. First, hate speech is bullshit. Second, it's not like a joke in a video game is going to somehow undo 50 years of women's rights. Third, who cares about hateful speech against another human being? In this day and age of instantaneous communication, why does it fucking matter? Don't you see this enough everyday to just not care? They're just words.

It's a silly fucking joke. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill.

Indeed, who cares about hate speech? Why yes, we should call Jewish people the K word, and black people the N word in the street. I mean, we all heard it enough in rap music and the internet, so we should be totally desensitized to that sort of thing.

Wait! Video games are violent, and we see this stuff enough not to care right? So, why don't we start murdering eachother? Lets make murder legal! Since its been around for such a long time, why should we care?

you really need to stop being so sarcastic. people might think you're serious

My chief weapons are sarcasm and fear!

 

[Sentox6]

Ugh. Gamer comments to anything feminist/women-issue related turn my stomach.

Not as much as this comment turns my stomach, I'm sure.

Gaming is a hobby/activity. It's not an ideology. It's not a belief system of any sort. You can't generalise the opinions of individuals on the basis that they all play videogames. That's just totally ridiculous. You might as well disparage the opinion of skateboarders or motorcyclists on feminist issues. Zero. Relevance.

 

[Partezan]

Fine, BlackRacistWhore then. Whatever. But "Whore" is by no means general. It refers specifically to a person who sells their body for sex. In the broadest possible sense, it means someone who sells themselves out.

Then again, it's also frequently used as a slur against women, because women are frequently judged on the basis of their perceived sexual morality in situations that have nothing to do with sex.

Exactly, the character sells her self out because of her looks, her whoreness is very much implied in her bio: "She is hired not just for her skills but her looks as wealthy men did not mind showing up with Purna on their arm."

So someone who gets paid money to show up on rich people's arms... Someone the sells out for money... nuff said I think.

That doesn't make a damn bit of sense. How do her looks, or anyone else's for that matter, damage zombies? It's painful watching you contort logic to try to justify this. Why is it so hard to believe that the programmer may just be a sexist douche?

It doesn't make any sense, that's why you should take it up with the company who designed the character and gave her that skill int he first place, why should her looks deal more damage to main zombies?!? it's completely sexist, to BOTH men and women I think, but you seem to only care about the women for some reason.

And that's still pretty fucking offensive, because she isn't a whore in any legitimate sense of the word. And again, never mind the litany of other ways I listed before that he could have expressed this point, rather than sticking in code no one outside the company was ever supposed to see anyway. Why not simply call the ability "SexistPurna"? That conveys the point nicely in a way that is both much more accurate and much harder to misconstrue as denigrating to women.

There's nothing degrading to women in the name, the only thing degrading to women is the character as a whole since I don't believe the majority of women are sell outs or whores, describing Purna as a whore is pretty accurate tho and if women decide to imitate the character then yes, they are all whores and the coder offended all women, but then they deserve to be offended.

Since you brought up her backstory, according to what i've read, she's a former police officer turned bodyguard. Maybe in those occupations she needed to learn specifically how to subdue men who are larger than her. Or maybe she just really does hate men? I haven't played the game so i'm not sure how she treats the human male characters. She did lose her cop job for shooting a child molester who was above the law; maybe she suffered a history of abuse and has issues with men resulting from it. I don't know. But both of those explanations make a lot more sense to me than your "magic whore powers" theory.

That's my whole point, it's sexist to women to imply that a woman needs to whore herself out to do her job rather than relying on her skills, but that is what she is doing, i don't really understand how you can justify in any way a woman using her looks to get her way as not sexist??? Like I said, the coder is just pointing out WHAT IS ALREADY THERE. not calling her a whore does not stop her from being any less of a whore.

As for the "magic whore powers" IT'S NOT ME IMPLYING THIS BUT THE GAME IT SELF, I HATE IT< I THINK THE CHARACTER NEEDS TO DEAL DAMAGE EQUALLY AND IT'S COMPLETE MYSANDRY TO TARGET MEN AT ALL. There is no excuse. Put it in the context of a white man dealing extra damage to black zombies because a black guy robed him, so now he hates black people. Ask yourself how that could fly? The only way that would fly is if 1. The character was shown to be evil 2. The character was a complete joke. in the end i expect misandry from most people but to attack someone who is pointing it out is just asinine to me, especially when you don't even give credit to the source

 

[cobra_ky]

Fine, BlackRacistWhore then. Whatever. But "Whore" is by no means general. It refers specifically to a person who sells their body for sex. In the broadest possible sense, it means someone who sells themselves out.

Then again, it's also frequently used as a slur against women, because women are frequently judged on the basis of their perceived sexual morality in situations that have nothing to do with sex.

Exactly, the character sells her self out because of her looks, her whoreness is very much implied in her bio: "She is hired not just for her skills but her looks as wealthy men did not mind showing up with Purna on their arm."

So someone who gets paid money to show up on rich people's arms... Someone the sells out for money... nuff said I think.

The bio describes how her male clients think of her, not how Purna feels about herself. In fact, that's actually a pretty sexist character description, since it's describing a female character solely terms of how men view her.

Just because men think of her as a whore doesn't mean she's "selling herself out" as one. She could be completely oblivious to it, or she could be painfully aware of it, and she hates knowing that some of her clients are hiring her just to be eye candy. Maybe she dislikes men in general for that reason, maybe she doesn't.

In any case, that bio doesn't say anything about how she views her relationships with her clients.

That doesn't make a damn bit of sense. How do her looks, or anyone else's for that matter, damage zombies? It's painful watching you contort logic to try to justify this. Why is it so hard to believe that the programmer may just be a sexist douche?

It doesn't make any sense, that's why you should take it up with the company who designed the character and gave her that skill int he first place, why should her looks deal more damage to main zombies?!? it's completely sexist, to BOTH men and women I think, but you seem to only care about the women for some reason.

You're the only one who said it had anything to do with her looks. You're the one who brought up her looks in the first place. I never thought her looks were relevant in the first place.

And that's still pretty fucking offensive, because she isn't a whore in any legitimate sense of the word. And again, never mind the litany of other ways I listed before that he could have expressed this point, rather than sticking in code no one outside the company was ever supposed to see anyway. Why not simply call the ability "SexistPurna"? That conveys the point nicely in a way that is both much more accurate and much harder to misconstrue as denigrating to women.

There's nothing degrading to women in the name, the only thing degrading to women is the character as a whole since I don't believe the majority of women are sell outs or whores, describing Purna as a whore is pretty accurate tho and if women decide to imitate the character then yes, they are all whores and the coder offended all women, but then they deserve to be offended.

She's not a whore. Attractive women who have jobs are not all whores. Attractive women cannot control whether their customers choose to hire them based on their looks or their abilities. You're holding women responsible for the decisions men make about them, and that is degrading to them.

What's she supposed to do? Be less attractive?

Since you brought up her backstory, according to what i've read, she's a former police officer turned bodyguard. Maybe in those occupations she needed to learn specifically how to subdue men who are larger than her. Or maybe she just really does hate men? I haven't played the game so i'm not sure how she treats the human male characters. She did lose her cop job for shooting a child molester who was above the law; maybe she suffered a history of abuse and has issues with men resulting from it. I don't know. But both of those explanations make a lot more sense to me than your "magic whore powers" theory.

That's my whole point, it's sexist to women to imply that a woman needs to whore herself out to do her job rather than relying on her skills, but that is what she is doing, i don't really understand how you can justify in any way a woman using her looks to get her way as not sexist??? Like I said, the coder is just pointing out WHAT IS ALREADY THERE. not calling her a whore does not stop her from being any less of a whore.

As for the "magic whore powers" IT'S NOT ME IMPLYING THIS BUT THE GAME IT SELF, I HATE IT< I THINK THE CHARACTER NEEDS TO DEAL DAMAGE EQUALLY AND IT'S COMPLETE MYSANDRY TO TARGET MEN AT ALL. There is no excuse. Put it in the context of a white man dealing extra damage to black zombies because a black guy robed him, so now he hates black people. Ask yourself how that could fly? The only way that would fly is if 1. The character was shown to be evil 2. The character was a complete joke. in the end i expect misandry from most people but to attack someone who is pointing it out is just asinine to me, especially when you don't even give credit to the source

My whole point is that it's NOT already there. You chose to to build this narrative about a whore whose appearance can be damaging to men somehow. You inferred this from an in-game ability and a single sentence from her bio.

For what it's worth, i do think the Gender Wars ability is a pretty silly and lazily-designed one. Though it does make a bit more sense than a racially-based ability because men and women do tend to be quite different physiologically.

 

[Zarkov]

I bet if it said something against men on a male character, like "pig", nobody would say a thing about it being bad.

Of course not; it wasn't men who were neglected their rights for almost 5 centuries or more, now was it?

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I bet if it said something against men on a male character, like "pig", nobody would say a thing about it being bad.

Of course not; it wasn't men who were neglected their rights for almost 5 centuries or more, now was it?

So that makes it ok for bad things to be said about men, but not women?

 

[Altar]

I bet if it said something against men on a male character, like "pig", nobody would say a thing about it being bad.

Of course not; it wasn't men who were neglected their rights for almost 5 centuries or more, now was it?

Ah yes, the whole I should go to prison because my great great grandfather killed someone argument. Love it...

 

[Zarkov]

I bet if it said something against men on a male character, like "pig", nobody would say a thing about it being bad.

Of course not; it wasn't men who were neglected their rights for almost 5 centuries or more, now was it?

So that makes it ok for bad things to be said about men, but not women?

Yes, actually, yes it does. Because of our history of constantly insulting women, insults towards them are now considered severe. Insults toward men will never get any credible notice because there was never a point were men were mocked for being men. The ONLY reason we but stress on "FeministWhore" skill is because of the background of abusing women verbally. If there were no such history, "feministWhore" skill would be considered funny at most but probably just immature.

 

[Partezan]

Yes, actually, yes it does. Because of our history of constantly insulting women, insults towards them are now considered severe. Insults toward men will never get any credible notice because there was never a point were men were mocked for being men. The ONLY reason we but stress on "FeministWhore" skill is because of the background of abusing women verbally. If there were no such history, "feministWhore" skill would be considered funny at most but probably just immature.

No, no it doesn't, that's just your retarded opinion. Are you saying that a black guy has the right to lynch a white person that in no way oppressed them because their ancestor did it? Do you see how you are retarded? not sure you do...

The fact is men are CONSTANTLY been mocked for being men, being a man has become taboo in today's culture, they are constantly portrayed as idiots and it seems to have rubbed off on you.

 

[Zarkov]

Yes, actually, yes it does. Because of our history of constantly insulting women, insults towards them are now considered severe. Insults toward men will never get any credible notice because there was never a point were men were mocked for being men. The ONLY reason we but stress on "FeministWhore" skill is because of the background of abusing women verbally. If there were no such history, "feministWhore" skill would be considered funny at most but probably just immature.

No, no it doesn't, that's just your retarded opinion. Are you saying that a black guy has the right to lynch a white person that in no way oppressed them because their ancestor did it? Do you see how you are retarded? not sure you do...

The fact is men are CONSTANTLY been mocked for being men, being a man has become taboo in today's culture, they are constantly portrayed as idiots and it seems to have rubbed off on you.

Oh, by the way, thanks for calling my opinion retarded. Sure, I shouldn't care what you think, but you act as though I hurt your precious feelings. Get over it... we are here to discuss not to "argue" per se. But alas, I'm on the internet, so I don't exactly expect manners when I get into a discussion with someone.

I think you're missing the point a bit. Sure, a white man shouldn't be lynched because of his ancestors, but the other black guy should be helped considering his probable state of affairs. Usually when one's ancestry had a hard time, this follows suit to other generations to follow it thus becoming hard to break. This is why special attention and reparations are paid to minorities and women in hopes that there will be no difference between them and the white man someday.

Oh yeah, men have it so bad. Let me tell you, with all the higher pay, better jobs, and generally better acceptance into institutions. You must live somewhere totally opposite than me, so to clue you in I live in America. As socially backward as we are, you can see the stand point from which I take.

When someone says, "get back into the kitchen", this is taken much more harshly than if a women were to have said "go watch football" or something that could be taken as a stereotypical comment about a man.

Do you see the difference and where history plays a greater role than overall equality? The reason we act harshly to something more than other things is because of past experience.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

As a male feminist (yes, they exist. I believe in gender equality. Ergo, feminist. And, in the words of Linkara, "I AM A MAN!" *punch*), my take on this is a bit conflicted. The joke itself is harmless, and people genuinely offended by it need to relax. However, adding the code to the game proper, and not removing it, is grossly unprofessional, and the party responsible does deserve to be punished for it.

And if you were offended by it, enough to complain about the company being "sexist jerks" or such, here's something for you.

 

[Zarkov]

I think you're missing the point a bit. Sure, a white man shouldn't be lynched because of his ancestors, but the other black guy should be helped considering his probable state of affairs. Usually when one's ancestry had a hard time, this follows suit to other generations to follow it thus becoming hard to break. This is why special attention and reparations are paid to minorities and women in hopes that there will be no difference between them and the white man someday.

Oh yeah, men have it so bad. Let me tell you, with all the higher pay, better jobs, and generally better acceptance into institutions. You must live somewhere totally opposite than me, so to clue you in I live in America. As socially backward as we are, you can see the stand point from which I take.

When someone says, "get back into the kitchen", this is taken much more harshly than if a women were to have said "go watch football" or something that could be taken as a stereotypical comment about a man.

Do you see the difference and where history plays a greater role than overall equality? The reason we act harshly to something more than other things is because of past experience.

I guess you don't see the insanity in punishing a group of people based on their skin color and gender. White women in America are the most privileged people on the planet, and you need to get your facts straight, men get paid overall more than women BECAUSE THEY WORK HARDER. It's ILLEGAL to vary cost based on gender, no one is "holding women down" anymore, they simply don't work as much and don't take as much risk as men do when it comes to business and hence hold less money.

Oh yes, feminists are quick to take pride in positive attributes like women being SAFE drivers, but when that attribute has a negative effect it must always be "THE MAN" oppressing them, um, no, anyone that's been in the work force has seen women put their hand up first when offered to finish a shift and go home early, yes some women work hard, but overall they don't and it has nothing to do with them being held back. This is why men are responsible for over 95% of on the job deaths, because they either end up very rich, or very poor or in the grave while women maintain the status quo.

So stop throwing around your brainwashed retarded feminists statistics, men get paid more because they work harder and pay for it, or did you forget that men live much less than women do or commit more suicide? moron, you make me want to throw up, I hope for your sake that you are honestly retarded and don't actually buy into any of your bull.

have fun!

"I guess you don't see the insanity in punishing a group of people based on their skin color and gender."

What? That doesn't even make sense. Can I call troll on this one, or what?

Let's ignore the ad hominem attacks for a moment, and think about your argument logically;

1. You addressed that the current wage difference between a male and a female is different because males work harder. Your argument, a generalization, is that males work harder than females [and there is no such evidence to support this claim] while my argument is that there is a bias against women in the work place which can be backed up by centuries of history. I'll move on, no need to discuss this further.

2. You argue that feminists aren't quick to take hold of the "negative effects"? And that women... are first to take off? Uh... you have no way to prove this, whatsoever. And then you say that men are responsible for 95% of on-job deaths?

Okay, so the underlying tone here is that women, on a generalization, are weaker in that they don't like to work so they take any chance to leave, and you also argue that women don't put themselves in harms way? I'm sorry, but you sound incredibly sexist, only because nothing you said there is in any way true. I'm a man and I've got a lot of work experience, and this has never been the case.

3. And then you argue that my statistics are feminists statistics and that... wait, didn't you just spout out a statistic just a few lines ago? This can't be true right? You did this on purpose right? Because if you didn't... oh wow.

I'm sorry, but this post has got to be the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Your post becomes increasingly ridiculous and contradictory until you call me a brainwashed feminist...

I'm not a feminist, I just form my opinions around what I think is correct.

And I was sitting here thinking that you'd actually make a viable point, but most of it is biased sexism, with a topping of ad hominem. And you didn't even address my most important argument: that past experience is what forms our opinions and insults now. Maybe because it's actually true, but you really didn't do anything to persuade me.

This has been a good time, and some good laughs, but it's gotta end before mods catch me calling you a troll and provoking you just for the hell of it.

So, Tchuss!

EDIT: Now that I'm thinking about it, he did call me retarded and was derogatory throughout his whole message, mods... -poke-

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

bahahah this thread is still kicking? off of one line of meaningless code?

my goodness

reminder to self: never make joke ever again, having a sense of humor and lightheartedness is apparently taboo in the working environment.

hopefully this guy doesn't lose his job over something so trivial.

i'd be curious if a woman had made that line of code, if this would be getting the same treatment...

another note to self, make an extremely white male joke in work environment some day, see what kind of shit brews up.

 

[Partezan]

"I guess you don't see the insanity in punishing a group of people based on their skin color and gender."

What? That doesn't even make sense. Can I call troll on this one, or what?

Let's ignore the ad hominem attacks for a moment, and think about your argument logically;

1. You addressed that the current wage difference between a male and a female is different because males work harder. Your argument, a generalization, is that males work harder than females [and there is no such evidence to support this claim] while my argument is that there is a bias against women in the work place which can be backed up by centuries of history. I'll move on, no need to discuss this further.

2. You argue that feminists aren't quick to take hold of the "negative effects"? And that women... are first to take off? Uh... you have no way to prove this, whatsoever. And then you say that men are responsible for 95% of on-job deaths?

Okay, so the underlying tone here is that women, on a generalization, are weaker in that they don't like to work so they take any chance to leave, and you also argue that women don't put themselves in harms way? I'm sorry, but you sound incredibly sexist, only because nothing you said there is in any way true. I'm a man and I've got a lot of work experience, and this has never been the case.

3. And then you argue that my statistics are feminists statistics and that... wait, didn't you just spout out a statistic just a few lines ago? This can't be true right? You did this on purpose right? Because if you didn't... oh wow.

I'm sorry, but this post has got to be the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Your post becomes increasingly ridiculous and contradictory until you call me a brainwashed feminist...

I'm not a feminist, I just form my opinions around what I think is correct.

And I was sitting here thinking that you'd actually make a viable point, but most of it is biased sexism, with a topping of ad hominem. And you didn't even address my most important argument: that past experience is what forms our opinions and insults now. Maybe because it's actually true, but you really didn't do anything to persuade me.

This has been a good time, and some good laughs, but it's gotta end before mods catch me calling you a troll and provoking you just for the hell of it.

So, Tchuss!

EDIT: Now that I'm thinking about it, he did call me retarded and was derogatory throughout his whole message, mods... -poke-

You are a man!?! Then i truly feel sorry for you, because you are either a mangina or a white knight that will only learn his lesson the hard way with a little bad luck. I'm leaning more towards mangina since running for the hills and putting two fingers in your ears when having an argument is the number one thing a mangina would do.

YES, men contribute to over 95% of deaths on the job, the difference between that statistic and the feminist statistic of men being paid more is that it's pretty clear how the statistic is calculated. The feminist one is not measured between men and women working the same amount of hours in the same company doing the same job, because, that is ILLEGAL. Take the survey again and ask how many hours those men work compared to women and you will see a more realistic result (but feminists are rarely interested in anything real). Or find out the details of what both people actually do (instead of listing qualifications alone as justification for someone to earn the same money).

If women want to earn more money than men THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING THEM FROM PUTTING TOGETHER AN ALL FEMALE COMPANY. (You want to have an all male company??? HA! sorry brother, that's discrimination.)

2. Wow, for a non feminist you sure like to defend your feminists don't you? But I guess you are not one since if you ever read any feminist literature you would now even have to ask about it. Here boy, go and fetch me an article that reflects men anywhere near in the same way as this one for example reflects women: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/women-are-better-investors-and-heres-why-2011-06-14

Did you like it? Women are better at everything huh? Le sigh, if you really are a man I hope you open your eyes and stop shutting off your ears. Leftist too huh? No doubt about it... le sigh, have fun. If you are a man you are blind, walking the edge of a murky pool filled with piranha screaming like an imbecile how you'd love to go for a swim.