Slashdot Mirror
No Same Sex Marriage In World of Warcraft?
Previously, we discussed a World of Warcraft guild representative getting reprimanded for mentioning same-sex relationships while advertising their organization. The subject hasn't been dropped in the intervening days, with GamePolitics providing an update to the community's reaction. Additionally, a Cathode Tan post links to a supposed discussion with a GM that kind of wrecks their whole equal treatment statement. From that post: "[GM] Anyone can report and we will take appropriate action. While it may seem ok because they are truly a heterosexual couple in real life, in game they are two females. Please keep in mind, you need to worry about the other players. While I do understand where you are coming from, there are those who do not have the maturity"
...queer, even.
Grammar Lesson: you're is a contraction of "you are"; your means you possess something; yore means days gone by.
Obplug for my friend's blog, but I think she says it best:
"...having spent a little time in World of Warcraft myself, I would have to agree that a large number of WoW players really are poop-flingers who can't even spell tolerance, let alone practice it. But if I were one of the few non-gold-farming players left in WoW, I think I would be insulted by [Blizzards] response, no matter how I felt about GLBT guilds. And what about the Christian WoW guilds? Will Blizzard shut them down too?"
Mox
"[Sylveri] So we suffer because of their lack of maturity"
Yes. That's almost always the case. Because other people are too sensitive and might get their feelings hurt by seeing/hearing things they object to, it's in Blizzard's best interest to put a muzzle on things that are potentially offensive or would cause other problems ("LOL FAGS").
It's an interesting variation on being politically correct, but that's really all it is.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
What next?
/.
He's playing a Female character... That's not right!!!
She's playing a Male Orc...
It's a freaking Game. A ROLE playing game. This is insane...
I can't believe this made it onto
As opposed to human females performing unspeakable acts with male gnomes, which is just fine. Date outside your species, just get the sex right.
Reminds me of the old "Finding Nemo" joke.
"Why are the fundies so mad about Finding Nemo?"
"Because Ellen Degeneres is in it!"
"She's a talking blue fish!"
"Yeah, but she's a lesbian talking blue fish!"
If I had a club for RWWCHM (Right Wing White Christian Homophobic Males)?
Then perhaps a Mature server should be setup to set these kind of topic to rest, not sure how they could regulate that kind of scenario but then again.. that's not my job! And please give me a break, don't tell me there is a single teen out there that doesn't know about same sex couples.
What the hell? You're comparing kiddy fiddlers and biggots to people who happen to find members of the same sex attractive?
A white christian centric group who is "white pride" friendly.
I think Blizzard is trying to play the middle of the road by saying none of any of the potentially offensive topics as guild themes rather than need to play morality police with which are and arent offensive and to who.
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
It's a game. And more importantly, a business. They will do whatever they need to to keep maximum profitabiliy.
*Fortitudo, aequitas, fidelitas.*
First, you wanna marry your life partner.
Next, you wanna marry the gold you've farmed.
After that, you'll be bitching that Blizzard is not allowing you to have sexual relations with your gold, despite the fact that you've legally married it. Also, why the hell is Blizzard not allowing gold/player hybrid children? They are very narrow minded.
You people need to shut up and just play the game, not make it a goddamn progressive liberal struggle. You want to change the world? Don't start with a stupid GAME - write your politicians to legalize gay marriage, start petitions, attend rallies and be more proactive in real life. This is only a game.
No, and for good reason. The groups you mention both advocate the hurting others. Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation, while "pedo's" prey on children. GLBT would just like to do their thing without being attacked for it. Huge difference.
A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?"
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
This is as I warned! First you allow interracial marriage- Humans and gnomes, dwarves and tauren. Disgusting! Now these same groups want to take a step further. Two troll males as fathers?!? This is unnatural! They cannot have children. This is not the way it is supposed to be. They should not be allowed to adopt either. Can you imagine the poor child with two Tauren daddies? Or two undead mommies? Inconceivable!
/please don't take these comments seriously ;p
The next thing you know, these same groups will be preaching polygamy. Kalimdor cannot support this! It is a slippery slope!
**disclaimer**
I think it's time to break out the scheissheim...
I wouldn't defend their views and I wouldn't compare them .
However I would support their right to hold their views , so long as they are not forcing their views on others , such as racial intimidation , or grooming children .
The difference between GLBT , Aryan Nations and Pedophiles is simple.
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender .
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
a tauren going by the moniker admiral ackbar protested a guild whose website featured caricatures of the prophet mohammad. he threatened to use his flamestrike scroll to call down a pillar of fire, burning all infidels within the area for 58 to 74 fire damage and an addition 48 damage over 8 sec unless the offending caricature of the prophet mohammad, as a mad bomber, was removed (oh, the irony)
in all seriousness folks, that online life should mirror real life, in terms of some of the more inflammatory and intractable issues we face in the real world in our time, should be expected
don't expect an easy resolution to this, and don't expect issues like this to be any less controversial online. as real life goes, so will online life toe the line. online life is no escape from offline ideology, however maddening, silly, or serious you take any given controversy
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
And, like it or not, 60-70% of the American public is against gay marriage being on the same footing or legally the same thing as heterosexual marriage.
If allowing gay marriage in their game pisses off more people than it pleases, it'd be a bad business decision.
The "Why" of what their game-playing population doesn't matter to them.
You know this will ruin the sanctity of online marriage.
Maybe they should create a monster named Santorum that will unleash a frothy mixure of lube and fecal matter upon the players that choose to have a gay marriage
Ban marriage in the game. Tell me it's not easy to accomplish. Nothing can be as fair as that! Why does a MMORPG need marriage anyways??
Oops, how did this get here?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
And How About Marriage Of EarthlingsTo Martians?
This game must be administered by a citizen(s) of the Unites States Of America. What a bunch of either of:
a) relgious zealots/nutcases
b) immature intellectually impoverished children
c) money grubbers.
A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?
and the answer to that is Yes. There are several Christian guilds and they are quite public about it.
As a victim of sexual abuse, yes.
That's a very "intolerant" view there... They do something you don't agree with.
Bigots have the "right" to dislike you. What they don't have the right to do is infringe on your rights in expressing their views.
Uhm, why don't they just create a world where people are okay same sex relationships? And a separate world for the bigots?
"OZ is recruiting all levels | We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)"
Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild.
Seems clearly contrary to a policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As it should be, for discriminating on that basis is simply wrong. Whichever way that discrimination is going. People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation.
Hey, it's all 1's and 0's in WoW. And you can't have 1's consorting with other 1's while 0's consort with other 0's. Why if that happened the first time a big, nasty XOR came along everything would become nothing, and then where would you be?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Aryans promote a viewpoint that you don't agree with. If we're talking about tolerance, you should be just as tolerant of an Aryan group's right to exist as much as a GLBT group.
Okay, being besides the point that the meat of this article has nothing to do with gay marriage, MMORPG marriage, or anything else, however states a snippet about an unrelated incident having to do with gay marriage, we'll move on to the valid point of the article...
Now, someone may have to clarify this for me, but basically, due to their anti-harrassment policy, you're not allowed to be against GLBT (Gays, Lesbians, Bis and Trans?) however it is also against the harrassment policy to support GLBT?
Damned if you do, damned if you don't?
Evil Walrus >83=
Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation
I'm Aryan, you insensitive clod! We don't advocate hurting anyone.
It's a sad state when the mere celebration of one's race, if not a minority, is automatically interpreted by others as racism. People who play the race card so frequently, I think, are the true racists.
"White pride" doesn't have to mean "down with blacks" any more than "Muslim pride" means "bomb America". Please don't generalize like this. It perpetuates the racism you might aim to solve.
Pedophilia is a crime. Gassing people you don't like is a crime. Being gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered is not a crime.
Your comparison of GLBT-friendly people to pedophilia-friendly people and aryan-friendly people is despicable.
oh yeah, Christians never advocate hurting others.
I hope you understand the difference between these, but apparently you don't. What homosexuals do is not illegal and they consent to enter into the relationship. Hate crimes and pedophilia are illegal and have victims who do not consent to be targeted for the behaviour.
I'll tolerate anything except intolerance.
"...People defend "GLBT-friendly" - would they defend "Aryan-friendly" or "pedo-friendly" as much as they do "GLBT-friendly?..."
Christ, are you really that stupid, or just trying to be controversial for it's own sake. "Trolling", even, as the kids call it these days...
GLBT, for all its PC horror is inclusive: Anyone who decides they are G, L, B or T can self-identify (PC alert again!) and join up.
An "Aryan-friendly" group is by definition exclusive and due to the misdemeanours of certain fans of the Aryan ideal it's still considered distasteful. "Pedo-friendly"? Something to do with feet? If it was "Paedo-friendly", some mob who were aroused by pre-pubescent children, I can't say I'd be a fan, but its a sight better than "Child-molester-friendly". The media can't make the distinction that Paedophile != child molester, but we're not that dumb. Are we? Eh? Ohhh shiiiit...
Political language
This notion that some of their players aren't mature enough to be tolerant is bunk.
Bull! Heard in Barrens Chat:
chuck norris will round kick some tolerence into you!
Vin Diesel could cut teh tolorence on this server with his erect nipples!
YOUR MOM!
"I wouldn't defend their views and I wouldn't compare them .
However I would support their right to hold their views , so long as they are not forcing their views on others , such as racial intimidation , or grooming children .
The difference between GLBT , Aryan Nations and Pedophiles is simple.
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender .
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born."
I will agree with this if you will agree that there are people in this world that do not agree with you. There are people who believe that GLBT groups are just as dangerous as pedophiles, that they "prey on children", and that they try to influence others to 'be like them' and view them as a "menace to society".
Comment removed based on user account deletion
From TFA:
So punish the harassers . Blizzard should sprout a pair and teach that intolerance will not be tolerated.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine what those server names should be.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Aryans are a people, not a racist organization, and they certainly don't wholesale advocate violence, as a people. WTF are you on? Also, on the reverse, there are certainly incidences of the GLBT community advocating violence, a simple google search will yeild many thousands of results.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
You lost me. You mean if you create something in order to keep people from being harrassed by other people, you're discriminating against the people who would be harrassing them by not allowing them in the guild?
I've heard of putting a spin on something, but that statement puts a tornado on it.
Evil Walrus >83=
The government shouldn't be in the marriage business.
Nullify them all.
But it's a damn *game*! WTF is wrong with anyone that they have to take things so seriously as to be oppressing others from the way someone plays a damn game!?
Why all the drama and politics in a.....*GAME*???
Regardless of your beliefs, and business practices, and stuff, it's still a damn game!!!
Geez, is it next going to be that people who make vids like Red and Blue or the Splinter Cell's Bob and Jim or whatever that one is, aren't going to be allowed because of something like this?
It's a damn GAME!!! Get off the serious wagon, and be upset that someone wants to enforce how a game is played based on un-expressed public discomfort over the fact. If no one had said anything at all, would this even be a big deal?
I'll bet not much of one if any.
--SuperBug
Let's get a little more exact here.
Being attracted to children is not a crime. Acting on it is in some countries.
Believing yourself to be superior to others is not a crime. Hurting others in an attempt to express that view or make that view a reality is a crime in some countries.
Being attracted to the same sex is not a crime. Acting on it is in some countries.
Be careful what labels you use. I'm only trying to point out the fact that it is a person's ACTIONS, not their BELIEFS or FEELINGS that are the issue here. However, there are people out there who will attempt to persecute you for your beliefs if they do not agree with them. The belief could be racial superiority, sexual attraction, spiritual, etc.
What do you mean you're only "ROLE-PLAYING" a female character?!
Those people are wrong and base this on the fear of the unknown or propaganda .
I perfectly accept those views , but GLBT people are just people who either happen to fall in love with those of the same gender , or are people who were unfortunately born into the wrong gender due to some fluke of biology(in the case of the Trans-gender folks) .
The Aryan Nations however espouse violence and hatred , pedophiles whilst not all active are fixated on sexual desire which can never be legal and is very hurtful.
People who look down upon the Pedophiles or the Aryan nations are basing this on solid evidence , as opposed to views on homosexuality which are based on very little.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Do you really think it's possible to implement the wide, sweeping reforms the LP proposes without completely destabilizing and possibly destroying the economy? And, moreover, since rich people are taxed much more than poor, don't you think it would wildly shift the distribution of wealth into the richest hands immediately and do an excellent job of destroying the middle class?
(Posting sans karma bonus because this is entirely off-topic)
+++ATH0
Interesting. You know, there are heterosexual couples in the game too. I guess they are losers as well. I mean, you'd have to be fair about it. The church is just being an idiot. They are the "gateway to god" and decide what should be perceived as good. I say screw the middle man.
SWG has allowed same-sex and inter-species marriage from the beginning - This was especially useful when males playing female characters wanted to marry their real-life girlfriends in-game. :)
There are people who believe that GLBT groups are just as dangerous as pedophiles, that they "prey on children", and that they try to influence others to 'be like them' and view them as a "menace to society".
These people are typically narrowminded and don't understand anything about what they fear... these people also are the ones influencing others to fear/hate. As far as i'm concerned it's people like this who are a "menace to society".
Why is it such a big f****** deal? Marriage - in the real world it's a sharing of posessions and religion / life. Ok, good deal.
In a game, it's a novelty. If you're married, you're probably playing in the same dang room together! How imporant is it really? And especially if it's a female and a female. World of Warcraft is a game created by Blizzard. If the same sex marriage takes away from the world they envisioned, then it is not meant to be. It is their choice, and it is their call. If it is so very imporant to the players that they be married, just chose a different race? How hard is it? They might even be able to request a "sex change" in from a GM if being married is so important.
Interspecies marriage = ???
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
"...Pedophilia is a crime..."
No it isn't. Pedophilia, or in commonwealth English, paedophilia, is the condition of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent children.
If the attraction isn't acted upon, then where's the crime? People who indulge in sex acts with prepubescent children are child molesters, not merely pedophiles.
Political language
and those that are offended can choose to not participate them, or fuck off, which ever is easier. Why do certain people feel this need to tell others how to act and what they find acceptable should be willed upon everyone else.
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
ffxi also bans same sex marrage... so its not exactly a new trend in mmo games
The laws around marrige and finances have nothing to do with what you're taking about. The reasoning behind it all is that if you are married to someeone, it is for all intents and purposes impossible for someone to accuratly track what is yours and what is your partners. Therefore there needs to be provisions for that, in the income tax act, in the housing act, etc etc.
The reason you can move your deductions onto your partners return and vice-versa, to get the tax breaks, is because even if there was no law allowing it **you could do it anyway**, because they would never be able to prove whose actual deduction it was in the first place, since you likely have joint accounts etc etc.
I say screw the middle man.
So... You're saying 3-way marriage should be okay too, then?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I was shocked to discover that people in non-urban areas appear to use the word "Jewish" as a general-purpose pejorative. Someone from rural Washington once said something like "fuck that, I don't care about Louisiana and their stupid jewish hurricane." Being from New York, I suppose I'll never be able to relate.
+++ATH0
Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation
How racist of you. "Aryan" refers to a blonde-haired, blue-eyed race of people. The fact that Nazis decided that particular race was better than all the others doesn't excuse you from being a racist bigot. You might as well call caucasians "racists" because the KKK are all white.
You know, yesterday I would have thought that was an apt analogy; but not today. See, today a debate on another forum demonstrated something I didn't anticipate learning: people react to the same thing very differently. Call a homosexual a fag and you'll get labeled a homophobe, and possibly charged with a hate crime. Draw blasphemous cartoons of Muhammad, and you get a number of Muslim countries boycotting your entire country, and widespread rioting. Say pretty much anything you want to about Christians (haha, homophobic, superstitious, clinically retarded crusaders) and... nothing happens. On occasion you might have a Christian complain about you, but nobody cares about them.
:P
I can't really remember what point I was going to make with this post, but I suppose I'll still throw that fact into the fray
You have tried to support your argument with faulty reasoning! Go directly to jail; do not pass Go, do not collect $200!
Seriously, are there any among us who don't roll their eyes when things like this come up? It's stupid forum drama, perpetuated by morons who all think that their opinion is the only one that matters.
It is very hard to be tolerant of people who would like to see you lynched
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
It figures somebody who would make such inane comments would be named "cannuck"
I could respond by saying Canada is full of fat girls with bad accents, but that would just be low class.
You are a child, and should be banned from any further public speaking
(btw, I love Canadian girls... Just proving a point)
Quit thinking so rational (and being so realistic). This is an article on Slashdot and you are supposed to be for the norm, against the norm, outraged, inraged, surprised, not surprised and so on. The discussion is not meant to be rational, but to be outrageous! You should be outraged that x did y! It doesn't matter that it was right or wrong you should be against it or for it, but in a non-rational manner.
Quality Hosting e3 Servers
By the same logic as the GLBT ban, a Christian friendly guild should not be permitted to recruit in general chat. Not everyone is christian, many people actively hate Christians, further muslims, jews and especially agnostics will feel alienated. Immature "anti-christian" people may feel compelled to bring their views into the game.
I'm just curious why people feel the need to bring any of this nonsense into the game. I don't have time to talk about who i'm having sex with or what I worship, there's too many things that need to die, die die. (or too much stuff to farm farm farm)
Maybe in the end it's all Blizzard's fault for not having enough content to keep everyone busy on the game.
I'd like to point out something here... EVERYONE here *assumed* that "Aryan" meant "Aryan Nation".
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/aryan
Aryans are a group of people, a race. By making this assumption, you put an entire race of people in the same 'bucket' as a small group of people who believe their race is superior (the Aryan Nation doesn't have the lockhold on this). How is that any different than someone seeing something referencing homosexuality and assuming they're talking about predatory homosexuals whose intent is to 'convert' people or to help them find their 'inner gay'?
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender.
... it's unnatural, it's immoral, it's an affront to God, etc, etc, etc.
... and there is already a referendum being put together to try and shoot it down.
...
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born.
Although the conservative religious right would say that there is a problem with being Gay or Trans-gender
It's the same reason that it's so difficult to get Gay right around the country right now. World of Warcraft is echoing the rest of the nation in the fight to some degree. Hell, in Seattle they are trying to make it illegal to discrimate against Gay/Lesbians in the workplace
The United States people are presently allowing the Conservative Religious Right to erode our freedoms based on their religious beliefs. And they call the country free
yes!
The Internet: Serious Business
There's something about a male troll and a male gnome bounding through the meadow holding hands that makes me shudder....
Yeah, my karma sucks....but so do the mods.
Immature people exist everywhere, my friend. Kinda like smoking pot: I thoroughly enjoy it, but there are those that try to convince me that I'm a drug addict and need to find help, while they're holding a cigarette in one hand and a beer in the other. In my opinion, stuff like this should be unmoderated in games (or real life, really). I mean, banning accounts for having names like "BigGayFlamingFaggotFucker", I understand. But in all honesty, like one of my Country's Prime Minister's once said, "What you do in the privacy of your own home, is your own business". Please don't take that out of context, I'm not in the mood to deal with inane flame-wars, it was said in the context of homosexuality anyways.
In short, WoW GM's are in no position of authority and/or capable and/or have the right to judge your life style. If the people engaging in the open display of homosexuality are mature about it, then I say let them be.
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
If Blizzard's actions piss you off, tell them about it.
Others find it hard to be tolerant of a group they see as violating 'the laws of God'. You're asking *them* to be tolerant, why shouldn't it be expected of *you* as well?
The guild was created with a policy of excluding some customers based on their views about sexual orientation. That's wrong.
It would also be wrong to discriminate against those with any particular sexual oriention in any other guild; this one was just far more obvious about its discriminatory policy. Discrimination is simply wrong, it doesn't matter whether it's being done by 10% of the population to the other 90% or vice-versa.
reagardless of belief, your analogy would only work if the GLBT were offended morally by Christians.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to govern any other" -John Ada
I prefer the solution implemented by my favorite MMORPG. In Clan Lord, a marriage can be between 2, 3, or 4 people of any class, race or gender. The justification for this is that 5 people can form a clan. (You can also declare yourself officially celibate, IIRC.)
But then, Clan Lord players are assumed to be mature.
What a fetid load of dingo's kidneys.
zoophilia: sex with an animal (that can't give consent)
necrophilia: there are public health issues as to what you do with dead bodies, not to mention your going against the wishes of the deceased or their families
group marriages: I have no problem with those whatsoever... if the group is willing to live up to the economic and social responsibilities of marriage, more power to them
cannibalism: you must be a troll
"This is a slippery path on which I wouldn't want to tread."
By your "logic", we can't raise the speed limit by 5 MPH, because then we won't be able to stop until we reach the speed of light.
We have an institution of marriage for a number of reasons. We don't restrict it to only fertile heterosexual couples, or two couples who are or guarantee they will raise children. We open marriage to all heterosexual couples.
Homosexual couples do all, all of the things that heterosexual couples do, including raise children (and bear and raise children in the case of lesbian couples). Why prevent them from marrying as well? There are good reasons for allowing same-sex marriage. If you have equally good arguments for allowing necrophilia, bestiality, cannibalism (I gotta hand it to you... that's a new one), etc., then present them.
The only reason we forbid homosexual couples from marrying is simple knuckle-dragging bigotry, nothing more.
"Making concensual sex legal..."
If this is all you think marriage is, then you are deeply, profoundly ignorant of the matters of which you speak.
"... is fine _as long_ as it doesn't give one extra rights: the right to adopt children, marry and receive tax exemptions."
So, it isn't about marriage after all... just money.
"Otherwise, I demand a tax refund for the time I lived together with several male friends: we didn't have sex with each other, but you can't discriminate against platonic relationships, can you? If the rights you are promoting would be applied, we could have made a fake group marriage"
If you are willing to live up to the legal, economic and social obligations of marriage with your roommate or a group, then get married, with my blessing.
wants to be the first monkey to touch the monolith
I don't understand the controversy. Homosexuality is MALADAPTIVE to species propagation. There's nothing politically charged in that statement, it's SCIENCE. Hence, a species that would prefer to continue existing would NATURALLY discourage same sex relationships because they are detrimental to the survival of the species. You can complain to the courts and activist mayors all you want, but you can't petition millions of year of EVOLUTION to change, just because you don't like the way the entire universe is wired. Go ahead and live however you like, but if you think you are gay, it makes ZERO SENSE to complain that the entire rest of creation is WRONG and that evolution should be reformed to meet your individual, biologically maladaptive preferences.
TO HELL with Blizzard for their intolerant tolerance policy. Take a stand and do something about the players who don't play by your rules - don't cut off a nose to spite a face.
/ Night Elves in WoW? No. Can you contract a sexually transmitted disease in WoW? No. Can you form any kind of meaningful, lasting bond with anyone that exists entirely within the game and doesn't require actual real-life interaction in order to keep it from getting stale because of limitations of software and hardware? No. It's a game and it's a computer - a data stream can't cuddle next to you in bed, a purely online buddy can't massage your shoulders, and an avatar can't make you breakfast the next morning. Get over it and keep what you do in the bedroom IN THE BEDROOM. Last I checked, you can't own a house in WoW, so if you're making hay, you're either doing it in public, or you're doing it on someone else's property without their permission - and neither of those is condoned in our society.
TO HELL with immature intolerant WoW players who can't be bothered to live and let live and allow people to make whatever choices they wish without ridiculing, tormenting, and otherwise being assholes toward people who happen to think or act differently from your perverted view of the normal world.
TO HELL with pathetic lifeless types who have to bring real life into a fantasy game. It's fantasy for a reason - it shouldn't be like real life. Role-playing has its uses and applications, but in the end, it's pretending and doesn't mean anything in the real world. Your avatar in WoW shouldn't be an exact extension of you in an online game anyway - that's what role-playing is: being someone you aren't.
TO HELL with people trying to insert sexuality (hetero, homo, or otherwise) into a situation that has no place for it. Can you give birth to little Taurens/Undeads/Orcs/Trolls/Humans/Dwarves/Gnomes
TO HELL with people forgetting that World of Warcraft is privately owned, privately operated, and they can choose whatever the hell they god damn jolly well please to have going on in their game. If they choose not to allow certain things, they are within their rights to do so. If you have a problem with it, LEAVE! Don't give them your money. But for the love of God, let us other less-finicky souls choose what we will and will not do with our time and money. Consumerism is a choice - take responsibility for your purchases and don't expect the manufacturers to tailor a wide-ranged product to your narrow views.
So your club would never take off. We needs to raid a stupid dungeon when you can raid the world!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Yeah, if you want any kind of non-standard relationship, you need to get a life... available here. ;)
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
There's no support in the game for Weddings apart from the "Wedding Dresses" and "Wedding Rings" that exist as objects in the game, right?
now i'm starting to spell like dan quail. shit.
Sitting Walrus Blog
... getting drunk in game to increase your fantasy stats is okay....
... doing drugs in game to increase your hitpoints/mana/endurance is okay ...
... racism in game is okay .... ala Race Wars... it's part of roleplaying, people...
... elves & humans, gnomes and trolls getting married is okay...
... heterosexual marriages in game is okay .....
... playing an evil race in game is okay .......
... you can worship any god you choose in game, and it's okay...
... killing the good & neutral races, or being racist against them (/roleplay) is okay...
... being a homosexual friendly guild is not... ??
... A made up, alice in wonderland, make believe world. Sesiously, what if my characted IS gay? ... and by gay... i mean happy. Really, it's make believe, anything goes, anything is game. Offend my fake, made up, fantasy character? Try it, and i'll kill you... -- okay Me being friendly to various types of ONLINE characters? not okay.
Someone make sense of this for me... It seems to me everything is 'fantasy' in a 'fantasy' world. You can drink booze? Think of the children! You can kill other things? Think of the children! You can be gay? NO, THINK OF THE CHILDREN. REALLY THIS TIME. Please, get back to being nothing more than racist against barbarians, you dark elves. WTF? How does this make any sense? Since when is entering a 'fantasy' world not fantasy? Say something like 'I wanna do three lizards at the same time' in public chat channels and you get a warning? And by 'do' I mean KILL, and that's okay. It's peoples own warped sense of values that lead to these stupid discussions.. They need to realize their values don't apply... it's fantasy.
Pedophiles physically and psychologically damage children. I don't see how you can compare that to two consenting same sex adults.
[Sylveri] I see, well thank you for your time. I'm sorry that the world hasn't come farter
I will admit I'm disappointed, my guild enjoyed this game immensely. Again, thanks for the clarification.
Bigoted is as bigoted does. An "aryan-friendly guild" and a "GLBT-friendly guild" are both discriminatory and bigoted. Just because one of those groups doesn't offend you personally -- that is, you are personally tolerant of that group -- doesn't make it any less bigoted. Blizzard is entirely in the right. It is a ToS violation to recruit people based only on their association to any one out-of-game group.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly... discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Umm, maybe you don't exactly understand what "GLBT friendly" means. It is not a sexual orientation.
Old people fall. Young people spring. Rich people summer and winter.
if you are so clever, who exactly is harmed by a GLBT friendly environment?
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Blizzard knows it's target demographic. This demographic tends to breed stupidity because of the anonymity they are allowed, also knowing that its hate speech (and this includes calling everything they dislike 'gay' and everyone they dislike a 'fag') is acceptable to Blizzard unless it is reported, which only warrants a warning. Blizzard wants to make money, and does so by supporting the masses who either intentionally prejudice or are so apathetic they use the above-mentioned terms without any thought of the profound consequences. If people started calling everything 'niggerish,' or 'kykeish,' the intelligent world that remains connected with reality would be outraged. Blizzard doesn't care to teach them a lesson by deleting their account and making their cd-key unusuable, they only care to prevent litigation that might result from their egregious negligence. This is one of the evils of a business that cares for little more than profit.
But, it's not a race, or a religion, things which were at one time the basis of persecution and by many, thought acceptable. Now people have moved on to hate based on sexual orientation, or any cultural movement perceived by many to be unworthy. Take the emo stereotype as an example. I posted on a forum something that was deeply emotional, and in retrospect I can see how it could be perceived as melodramatic, because as I posted it, I was in a temporary state of depression. Many of the comments called me 'emo' as if it were an insult, and then wished my death. People always search for something to hate and there are justifications for just about anything, whether or not they are reasonable.
Back to the topic. Blizzard is interested in making money, if they were to ban everyone who said 'gay' or 'fag' as a response to any instance of such words used with derogatory intent, they would lose a lot of money. I would predict that if the number of GLBT players deeply offended (and would thus boycott) by Blizzard's current policy was greater than the number that using such hate speech, they would have a different policy. Unfortunately, there's no way to replicate the WoW experience without using illegal player-run servers, which, if they gained popularity (deemed necessary to the success of an MMORPG by most) and cost Blizzard money, they would be shut-down. It is a certified monopoly and thus has power to spare and abuse for one motive: profit.
I think we can all agree that the use of censorship is potentially dangerous, but when there are a large number of minors playing, it's entirely unacceptable to expose them to such hate-speech, or allow them to participate in it, which at the very least forms negative habits. The right solution is to ban those who use hate speech, but nobody who would use the language in a discussion that does not dissolve into harassment.
GLBT is a reality just like any other quality or quantity we can observe, and to shun its existence in any medium it will propagate is an abhorrent abuse of power. To say there would be no homosexuals in a world with 'humans' or other intelligent beings is against the evidence we have today. Thus, it must be accepted and if there are those who would undermine its acceptance without reason, the harm they cause must be prohibited.
To punish those who advertise as GLBT-friendly because of the irrational responses others might have is tantamount to punishing someone for making a mistake in a party raid that causes everyone to lose their temper and succumb to anger and abusive language when a GM gets wind of the chat filter working over-time. With a reasonable GM, I don't see the second scenario ever occuring, but profits motivates the first.
I'm just curious why people feel the need to bring any of this nonsense into the game.
Because MMOGs are as much a social phenomonon as they are a game. Guilds are made up of people you expect to be spending a lot of time with and getting to know during the course of the game. People naturally want to associate with others who have similar viewpoints, just like IRL. As an extreme example, there are thousands of people that play on the Dark Iron WoW server because they are fans of the Penny Arcade or PvP comic strips (who's guilds battle each other constantly and have so many members that they actually had to split into several sub-guilds each due to in-game guild size limitations). That's pretty irrelevant to anything inside WoW, but they certainly get a lot of enjoyment out of tying those out-of-game activites to their gameplay.
You will find that every guild in the end filters its members to some degree by social skills not just by game skills. For example, guilds kick people out for being jerks all the time. Many guilds have charters stating that they are made up of "friendly, family oriented players" or something similar. Some guilds are just more organized about certain traits or opinions that they desire.
Oh I am tolerant , I just said it was very hard . The Aryan nation dislike me because of part of my ethnic origin and my religion, how I was born.
The people who dislike the GLBT people , dislike them because of the way the GLBT people were born.
*perhaps you could use a similar argument for the Pedophiles , it is how they were born , and I can respect that , they are not criminals till they act upon their desires for pre-pubesent children.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Right okay, so would it be acceptable if say a sports club banned people who are open about their non hetero sexualtiy?
What is canada like on this subject anyway? Is it closer to america on these issues or closer to mainland europe (legal gay marriages).
The basic idea that people should not come out with their X because it may cause others to start hating is truly evil. What next, you can say your black, a jew, a vegitarian? All because someone else might start to spout hatred?
Have we achieved nothing in the last century? I thought the days when people had to stay in the closet and try to blend into white christian hetero society were over. Guess not.
Next on WoW, women advised not to advocate their sex because it might cause others to harass them. Everyone can play WoW, just as long as they pretend to be a teenage white male hetero christian.
I wonder if blizzard hasn't just opened itself up for a couple of big law cases. No not lawsuits. Real law cases where the state steps in to ban those companies practicing discrimination.
No real life company would be allowed to get away with this in any civilized country.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
There's a difference between GLBT and pedophilia? It seems that if you are a pedophile, you are also by definition homo- or bisexual. Someone else mentioned Jacko and zoophilia in the same post. One could also make the connection that a subset of pedophiles are also zoophiles.
Seriously, if they want to swallow swords and pikes in WoW, they should be able to do so in a cave somewhere.
The guild was created with a policy of excluding some customers based on their views about sexual orientation. That's wrong.
No it wasn't. "GLBT Friendly" in this context doesn't mean that you approve of homosexuality. It means that you're capable of interacting in a friendly and polite manner with people who do.
The guild was created so that people who don't want to hear "gay" and "faggot" slung around as insults all the time will have a place to play.
Help prevent the slashdot effect; stop reading the articles.
no, that's a fact.
Sorry!
Pedophiles physically and psychologically damage children.
No, people who sexually abuse children damage them physically and psychologically. There's a big difference. People have just about as much choice whether to be pedophiles or not as they do to be homosexuals.
Only if your character's name is Pierre!
=tkk
Bill Gates - Creationist?!?
This shouldn't be an issue. WoW is called an MMORPG (massively multiplayer online ROLE PLAYING GAME)
1. Its just a game.
2. Role playing lets you do what ever you want, if I (a guy) want to be a lesbian in game what does it matter?
3. Its rated Teen for a reason. If you haven't been exposed to the homosexual lifestyle by this time or can't handle it you should get used to it. Chances are, its not going anywhere.
4. It's the internet, since the beginning people have been hiding their real identities and role playing as other personalities, what makes this so different?
Leave the issue alone.
"...I'd like to point out something here... EVERYONE here *assumed* that "Aryan" meant "Aryan Nation"..."
*I* didn't.
To assume that aryan = "Aryan Nation" is a spectacularly US-centric blunder, in any case.
If your group is "Aryan Friendly", then what are they to other races? "Jew Indifferent"? "Black Dismissive"? "Arab Snide"?
My point was that GLBT is self-selecting, while the other groups postulated by the OP are rather poor rheotorical strawmen that the OP imagines to be abhorrent to the
Political language
I'm Aryan, you insensitive clod! We don't advocate hurting anyone.
First of all, "Aryan" is a word with no real meaning, and your claim to be Aryan is absurd.
It's a sad state when the mere celebration of one's race, if not a minority, is automatically interpreted by others as racism.
It's a sad state when anyone celebrates race, regardless of what race it is. And, Aryan is not a race, you idiot.
"White pride" doesn't have to mean "down with blacks" any more than "Muslim pride" means "bomb America".
"Muslim" is not a race, you ignorant fuck.
Yay! So you decide to derride people for being bigots with sexuality, and end up being racist. :rolls eyes:
Great job there with the sweeping generalizations and comical caricatures of "the United States of America". I need to make a php script that posts comments on slashdot...
FanFictionRecs.net
Letting John marry Bob because "he loves him" and not letting M. Jackson love one of his kids even though "they love each other" means an inequality within the law.
WTF? Letting a grown-up soldier drive a tank after special training but not allowing it for 5-year olds means an inequality within the law?
John and Bob are consenting adults, Jackson's alleged kids aren't. Spot the difference?
Consenting adults should have the right to do whatever they please that harms none other.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
no, that is a stupid misinterpretation of tolerance.
in a free world, the only thing that can't be tolerated is
intolerance. funny, isn't it? but it's just common sense
and survival... if you allow intolerance, they will take away
your freedom.
and what about skewing reality to believe that being homosexual is actually right? what is that all about? mis-placed emotions on a member of your same gender where ultimate futility is found. it won't get you anywhere, and no matter of claiming bigotry or unfair treatment will stop that fact. just because you choose to be a certain way (no you weren't born that way), doesn't mean people have to accept it. <sarcasm> oh, it's about sex, that means people have to accept it </sarcasm>
Oh puleeeeze. Can't you find something else to suck your identity out of? Your toy is dangerous.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
* zoophilia :
.. but if they die (not killed by you) and gave prior consent , then again , why should we complain.
Find a fully consenting animal , then fair be it
* necrophilia :
Um yuck.. disturbing and unhealthy , but if your partner says that you can after they die.. then who am I to stand in your way, you are not hurting anyone really
* group marriages (including ones with under-age kids (Utah!))
Only with fully consenting adults.. I really don't see the problem . Polygamy is not wrong really , only when the other partner is not fully aware of the situation.
* kill-and-eat-me relations
again , probably not healthy
The key to this is mutual consent . It is not our place to interfere in the lives of others, we can tell them how we feel so long as we don't harass them .
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Sitting Walrus Blog
It's interesting to observe how real-life issues are so closely replicated in virtual forms. Let's take advantage of the virtual nature of the conflict (but only after we get over the fact that we're arguing over the social environment of make-believe computer characters). Let's have all of the pro-same sex marriage players on one side, and all of the hetero-only advocates on the other side. An all out war. Whoever wins gets to decide the policy on marriage rights for all of WoW. I bet we'd all be surprised to see who comes out of the woodwork to cast a spell or two. pd
A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?"
Not sure if it is allowed, but on WoW / Hyjal / Horde, I saw a guild recruiting, and the advert mentioned that they were a Christian guild. I did't report it to a GM because, despite the fact that I am not Christian and find the religion offensive, I am not a close-minded bigot like the people who deride LGBTs. I guess I should be more intolerant next time.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
GLBT community advocating violence
Advocating violence on the topic of homosexuality? Like, "let's go bash some straights?"
Or advocating violence in other contexts, like "we should bomb the fuck out of Iraq"? Because, you know, they are just normal people.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
During the presentation, we were informed that acting intolerant (i.e. racial slurs and such) could get us fired. I asked if other people could get in trouble for not tolerating my intolerance, and got in some trouble for it. Seems like they tolerate everyone but smartasses.
psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo
There are also people who really believe that the earth would be better if all the Jews were killed
Just because there are people with a viewpoint dos not make that viewpoint Valid or equal to other viewpoints.
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Children, animals and dead people are considered unable to know what the hell is going on. Besides not being able to get married, they're also unable to be a part of *any* legally binding contract. "Kill-and-eat-me relations" fall under murder or assisted suicide, both of which are illegal. It's not really that slippery a slope at all.
And if you really want that tax rebate, next time pick a female friend to live with. In some states you'd be married automatically if you stayed together long enough. Luckily our system prevents people from fake marrying in this way by applying common sense (as judged by a court of law) to see if you were actually married. All the judge has to do is ask you to start making out with your friends to see that you're full of it.
I for one see this dialogue as one that needs to take place. The point so many people are missing is the fact that behind these Orcs, Taurens, Gnomes, and such are real, actual people. Some of them are members of the GLBTQ community, and wish to extend that portion of their lives into that of their online persona. Where's the insanity in that?
Yes, this is a game. Yes, these characters are not real. But the emotional attachment to one's online avatar is quite real, and having a major portion of one's humanity cut off from expression due to an apparent "lack of maturity" by a bunch of random dipsticks just doesn't seem like justice to a lot of people.
You may see discrimination against the GLBT community as a trivial matter (there is differential treatment of same-sex marriage versus hetero marriage, thus discrimination). But being denied one's freedom to reference religion, for instance, would bother a hell of a lot of people, and such a denial would be just as arbitrary and unfair.
True, this debate is occurring within the confines of a private virtual world, but the community still has every right to *try* and make that world one they wish to be a part of.
What were they thinking? In spite of the fact that it's a game, it's also highly social since there are multiple simultaneous players and even moreso since there is cooperative play going on. And since it's social and since it involves humans, it's best to just let people be people for better or worse. When you try to regulate it, it really sours the whole thing. If they kept their hands off of it, they'd still be dealing with complaints about queers and christian, but at least they could respond the same way -- "we have a policy of non-interference with the social aspects of the game" and they'd be set. But no... now they're learning the hard way. Fun to watch though.
When does the Brokeback Mountain game come out?
Pedophilia is a crime IN THE WESTERN WORLD.
Gassing people you don't like is a crime IN THE WESTERN WORLD.
Being Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered is not a crime IN THE WESTERN WORLD.
Not everyone, or every nation, on the planet feels that way.
Heck, try preaching Christianity in Saudi Arabia, and see what happens. . . .
Canadian girls puffery than USA marshmellow girls? Eh!
Someone who opposes homosexual relationships in any form based on his beliefs and morals is not a bigot. Bigotry is an intolerance towards those holding different opinions from oneself. You can be opposed to homosexual relationships and tolerant of the individual.
People often in a fury of over-emotional reactions blur the line behind accepting of the individual and condemning of their actions. Just like I can accept my friend for who he is as a person I don't have to accept what he does or condone his own beliefs. You can care and love for someone without accepting some of their choices as correct or right despite what people think.
Which is not much. Homosexuality is a Hobson's Choice. Also, it's a well known FACT that pedophilia is an incurable mental illness. They're just not the same.
isnt there more important things in this world to worry about?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
a church ritual used in the middle ages (which, to be fair, is what WoW is basically a variation of) for two individuals of the same gender.
... it happens regardless of people trying to pretend it doesn't.
... would get love letters and stuff like that.
Me, I just play the Sims 2 - even the console versions have no problem with same-gender marriages - in fact, got a new xBox version of Sims 2 last night and ran thru with a female character who got married to her female roommate. Since she was a Romance aspiration sim and her roommate is one too, it works for them.
Quick, let's outlaw same-gender relationships for animals! Like they care
FYI, I'm straight and can't recall ever playing and same gender male relationships in RPG sims, although one time I ran a female character in a game and it's interesting how many guys fall in love with you when you're not even being friendly
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Trolling?????? ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - Just stating the truth
Not sure which religous fanatics are worse - religous fanatic than want to ban same sex marriage in a GAME (or in real life) with those religis fanatics that want to ban/kill/ folks who wish to make fun of Mohammed.
Both fanatics have more than a few screws loose.
I have no issues with gay marriage. If gays want to fuck each other in the ass - that's their business. My only issue with the whole thing is that I think same sex couples should not be allowed to adopt/raise kids. A kid needs both mother and father, IMO. Otherwise you're just messing him/her up.
Once we close this threshold - I will do whatever I can to help ban gay marriage for this reason alone.
Nine states allow openly gay couples to joint adopt, only Florida forbids it outright.
These 8 million children overwhelmingly live a healthy, caring environment. I highly recommend reading about gay adoption, it may surprise you how common and healthy it is.
Speaking as a psychologist, there is no psychological reason why people need to be of opposite sex to be 'good enough' parents.
Children are remarkably adaptive, having care givers that love and support is what is important, not the sex of said caregivers. To suggest otherwise is to either show bigotry, demonstrate political bias or to be woefully ignorant. You may not like gays, but don't pretend to be protecting children by saying those that want to raise younguns can't be parents. You are insulting many healthy children, terrific parents and violating active empathy. Breath and accept. It's okay to be wrong.
Letting John marry Jane because "he loves her" and not letting M. Jackson love one of his kids even though "they love each other" means an inequity within the law...
Oh wait, you may have constructed a logical fallacy. It does not follow that those two things are equal. Actually, the argument you constructed only appears to mean that if you allow marriage, you have to allow anyone to marry anything. Better ban marriage!
Secondly, most of the practices you mention are illegal beccause the object of the affection hasn't or can't consent to the sexual act. Group marriages were banned largely because it was observed that it tend to lead to incest and pedophilia. No serious study has linked incest or pedophilia to gay marriage.
And generally what is wrong with people who want to be cooked and eaten is that they are largely mentally ill (we generally class suicidal people as ill). We provide legal protection to the mentally ill.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
Last time i checked it (being sodomy)was still illegal in some parts of the world. /. a place where both liberal and conservative geeks can be ignorant.
That is incorrect. Look it up in dictionary.com. What it doesn't mean, however, is blond-haird, blue-eyed, white people like the nazis used it to mean.
I'd say the government has no business legislating what goes on in the bedroom of consenting adults.
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
Really. Send me a note with what freebies I've been missing out on all these years.
My wife's really good at finding us tax deductions and such, particularly with her running her own business. However, I don't recall her ever mentioning a deduction that we get just because we're married.
We get credits for the children, but one of us or the other would get that as a single parent as well. I don't know if it's ever been corrected, but if anything, we get penalized for being married. The standard deduction for a married couple is less than twice that of a single person. The thought process behind this little gem was that women stay home and raise kids while men go to work. Since the women had no income, they had nothing to apply a standard deduction against. This made it a tax benefit for a man to marry. Now that we have two income families, the standard deduction for a married couple becomes a penalty instead for the majority of families.
And what keeps parents together for the sake of children (assuming they no longer love each other) is more likely a fear of child support payments and possibly alimony (though alimony is less likely with the two income reality). Nothing like getting behind in your payments and instead of getting a car repossessed, the government wants to repossess your freedom (jail time).
To get back to the topic of the article however...
As far as WoW is concerned, I think it quite wrong-headed for them to deny a guild's existence based on sexual orientation. If they're concern is that there are kids playing, they better be prepared to remove guilds based on swingers, swappers, bi-curious, racially exclusive, religiously exclusive, or gender exclusive guilds as well.
Marriage (hetero / homo, catholic / bhuddist / hindu / muslim / protestant / wiccan / scientolocult / druidic, democrat / green / libertarian / communist / nazi / republican / socialist / anarchist) is a serious thing and should be treated as such (even if there aren't going to be kids). I suppose it's no worse than little kids playing house, but that usually dies down with adolescense. While it would be interesting to see an actual marriage status in a game, worked into the game mechanics in some way, I think it would be the wrong lesson to send to children (marriage being entered into lightly or equating it to being part of some big people game).
I see how it is... I guess I'll just have to recruit on slashdot now.
Join my guild! Guild application for Guildzorz, the hottest all-lesbian guild on WoW!
See answer key on below!
Question 1: Are you really a dude (y/n)?
Correct answer: N
Question 2: Do you mind that I'm a dude? (y/n)?
Correct answer: N
Question 3: Do you like cyber? (y/n)
Correct answer: Y
Question 4: Your race: (1. Night Elf, 2. Human, 3. Gnome, 4. Dwarf)
Correct answer: 1
Nice pablum for the /. masses.
Theaters and other businesses (and colleges for that matter) in the South didn't integrate until the law made them. You can't expect businesses to be the leaders in advancing society, however you want to define "advancing". They'll follow their customers.
Just look at Google or the founders of Ben & Jerry's. Google's doing business with totalitarian China, and when there were enough zeros after the dollar sign and crooked number, Ben and Jerry sold out.
You want a GLBT guild? Blizzard says "OK!"
You want a red-haired puppy lover guild? Blizzard says "OK!"
You want a hamburger flippers guild? Blizzard says "OK!"
You want a guild built around any inclusive or exclusive group you can dream up? Blizzard says "OK!"
BUT! and this is where the weeping and gnashing of teeth comes from...
You can't advertise it AS a restrictive guild, or a guild built around real life issues in game. Period.
You can use Official World of Warcraft Guild Recruitment forums (paid for by Blizzard, I might add) to advertise your guild, be it GLBT, radical Islamist, drunken bum... whatever. But you can't hop into General chat and say
"GLBT guild recruiting" or
"Christian guild recruiting" or
"Slashdot readers guild recruiting"
If it touches on a sensative real life issue, you don't discuss it public channels in game. Out of game... you go for it. Blizzard will even pay for the bandwidth.
As for marriages? Blizzard has said repeatidly... the tools are there to do it if you want to. Its not officially supported, but its not hindered either. You want two female cows to get married on top of the Twin Collusses? Go for it. Just don't advertise a lesbian wedding in general chat.
How many gay males playing as females on Warcrap?
How many straight males playing as females on Warcrap?
How many lesbians females playing as males on Warcrap?
How many straight females playing as females on Warcrap?
My guess - one in three!
... Because as you all know, I am the only gay in WoW.
This is the exact reason the Government (US, other countries, and Warcraft's government for that matter) should not be in the mariage business at all. They should allow Civil unions between anyone who wants to be united. It's like a partnership agreement between two individuals. It makes no difference if it's a man or a women or 3 individuals for that matter, it's just a civil union for tax purposes and for certain laws regarding hospitalization, power of atourney and the like. Then mariages can remain whatever the church wishes to define them as but according to the government, it's a civil union. This would make it much more reasonable for both sides since homesexuals could have all the legal rights they want (and any combination there of) and the people that want to define mariage as between a man and a women could still do so if that's what their church decides.
No Sigs!
Don't call it straight. It's right up there with gay, lesbian and the likes.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Quote from the hackers manifesto:.
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~soules/media112/hacker.htm
It's also quoted in the movie Hackers, by the actor Marc Anthony
We exist without skin color, without nationality, without religious bias...
It's a very sad day when we move the hatred that many of us tried to escape to our online playgrounds.
like, uhm, makin' war and killin' folk.
I fail to see what you are trying to illustrate by that statement.
I beg to differ. I once had to call a police officer because a homosexual man was pestering me in a train station. I had a couple of hours to wait, and wherever I went, there was that old faggot trying to seduce me. Yes, "gay" people do prey on young men, they do opress other people.
Of course, I do not advocate that anyone be punished by their beliefs, only for their actions. Performing homosexual acts between willing participants should not be a criminal offense, but trying to impose homosexual acts on unwilling participants should be.
In the same way, I do not think that collecting Nazi memorabilia should be a crime (it is in many countries, even those considered "democratic" ones). Or collecting pedophilic fiction, which is also a crime in many places, even if no children ever participated in its creation. There is a huge difference between performing sex with children and writing fiction about it, but in many places the legislation makes no difference between both acts.
Anyway, I have no desire at all to have social contact with homosexuals, racists, or pedophiles. I have the same right to my beliefs as they have to theirs.
It's their right to be homosexual. I mean, that would be the equivalent of me saying:
"Okay dude, it's cool that you're gay and all, but, um, while you're at my house... you gotta kinda... stop it."
I agree that they do maintain authority when it comes to smooth operation of servers,managing conduct and "player based issues". But, they don't have the moral duty (or as said above, ability) to judge your lifestyle, and thus, is something really, really, *really* taboo to start fucking with (not to mention, immature). Playing WoW is a priveledge, I agree with that. But just like driving is a priveldge, that doesn't mean that since you don't like cheese, you're not allowed to drive. Two things that have absolutely nothing to do with one another. And it's not a conflict, to be honest.
I mean, it's not a real "Problem", it's not interfering with other's gaming experience. Unless you're some insane, pickle-up-the-ass, christian fanatic, I don't see how that would bother you, and if it does, then you have to respect the fact that they have the right to make their own choices, and that your ranting would interfere with the Homosexual's right to enjoy the game without worrying about persecution.
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
Luckily our system prevents people from fake marrying in this way by applying common sense (as judged by a court of law) to see if you were actually married. All the judge has to do is ask you to start making out with your friends to see that you're full of it.
Er, what?
Show me a country where a judge can order a man to have sex with his wife.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Is that the sound of an Axe Gringing. WHO CARES. If Blizzard wants to ban all lesbian left-handed albino midget Eskimo, then let them. It's their game. Move along, log off, and if Not. LvL 60 Mage LFG UBRS.
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Put all the anti and pro gay extremists in to one giant colossium and have them try to kill each other while they entertain us. Then the subject dies with those people and THE END. No more problems, because the problem is dead, and the issue is moot.
(It is somewhat ironic that I got "munition" as the picture word to enter to post.)
Wait a minute, I thought (X)-friendly was 'inclusive' by definition? Isn't that what all the GLBTers have been saying from the beginning of this whole thing, that GLBT-friendly was inclusive by definition?
No, and for good reason. The groups you mention both advocate the hurting others. Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation, while "pedo's" prey on children. GLBT would just like to do their thing without being attacked for it. Huge difference.
I am going to play devils advocate here. My statements are not representative of my feelings.
while "pedo's" prey on children.
I have problems establishing the "intrinsic wrongness" of "pedophelia". Pedophelia is a legal concept. It doesn't necessarily exist as a moral one. For instance, if you're 19 and you have consensual sex with a 16 year old, in most states that makes you a sex offender.
It wasn't so long ago that girls were getting married at the age of 12 and were having reasonably productive lives as wives and mothers. I wasn't there but there wasn't a lot of literature written on the emotional damage caused to women due to marrying young.
The "intrinsic wrongness" of pedophelia is slippery enough that all we can really go on is what is legal or illegal. You cannot with a straight face say that a 15 year old girl can never have consensual sex with an adult due to immaturity, but an 18 year old can. The law, and thus the definition, is deficient for a a variety of different situations.
So, while we can certainly agree that there are things going on that are called pedophelia that are damaging to others, there are also things going on being labelled pedophelia that i think are perfectly fine.
I am assuming here, but i beleive pedophelia wasn't a separate crime until people saw that rape laws weren't effective in stopping this behavior. Yes, there are laws to stamp out non-consentual intercourse irrespective of age, but when its "consentual", we had to go and make laws that said "you are not old/smart/wise/whatever enough to give consent over your own well being".
IOW, "somebody" (society/the legal system) has decided that individual choice here should be overridden because even though the subject thinks they like the behavior (the consenting child), it's ultimately harmful to them and to society.
Now, next point:
GLBT would just like to do their thing without being attacked for it. Huge difference.
It is not a foregone conclusion that GLBT behavior doesn't do society intrinsic harm [just like it's not a forgone conclusion that puppies don't do intrinsic harm. I'm laboring towards a point, so please excuse me].
It is also not a forgone conclusion that GLBT relationships are free of harm for either party.
Suppose that you happen to beleive that homosexuality is ultimately harmful to those involved. You respect the right of individuals to make their own choices, but in this situation, you beleive that they are choosing a behavior that ultimately harms them.
In the case of pedophelia, "we" decided that the individual choice of a child was invalid and the behavior they were consentually participating in was ultiamtely harmful to them and thus should be illegal.
This, as a legal position, has a lot more to do with societal views and a lot less to do with science, certainly once you're talking about the teenage years.
So my point here is that what is or isn't "harmful" or "legal" has a lot more to do with the aggregate viewpoint of the society in context than it does with anything objective. To be more concrete about it, many fundamentalist christians beleive that practicing homosexuality is absolutely a sin (and it's well documented in the bible). They'd tell you that helping or enabling another to commit habitual sin is ultiamtely bad for that person. They'd tell you that that person is making choices for themselves that are ultimately harmful.
So i guess i am saying that the distinction between consentual pedophelia and consentual homosexuality isn't as cut and dry as you suggest. In one case, "society" has said "we're stepping in for the good of all" and in the other, it hasn't (not to
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Funtime Candy Wow! - my plan for eventually conquering Japan.
Ahh, good old Slashdot mods. Post something that makes them think about what 'tolerance' really is and they freak out and mod you to -999.
Tolerance is accepting that there are people out there with different views from you. One of those possible views is that they believe you are doing something wrong. Tolerance would be accepting that those people are out there and that they have the right to believe whatever they want. Since those people are out there, companies (like Blizzard) have the obligation to keep that disagreement (between you and them) from detracting from their product.
That is the point here, people.
Here's my viewpoint on this. I personally do not like the fact that gay or lesbians exist. I think that it is wrong and it perverts something that was supposed to be sacred, i.e. marriage. However, it's better to accept the fact that these players are paying for a game and should be allowed to have an equal amount of freedom. How would I feel if someone was trying to ban me for something similar? That said, I think that since being a gay or lesbian couple in WoW does not change the way the rest of the game goes, let it be that way.
If you are willing to live up to the legal, economic and social obligations of marriage with your roommate or a group, then get married, with my blessing.
Isn't it interesting how the trolls like the one you're replying to never seem to notice how trivializing of marriage their focus on the sex is, as if the only thing that distinguished marriage from other relationships is the fact that the parties to it get to have sex with each other with the blessing of the law, the church, god, and everybody.
Marriage is not just--or even primarily--about sex! It is about mutual aid and care, and taking shared responsibility, including shared responsibility for children. How one is wired up sexually is not an issue. That hardly describes a relationship between room-mates.
So here's a guide for trolls: if the only distinguishing feature of a relationship is sex, it's a hookup. If the distinguishing feature of a relationship is an openly-stated intent to help each other and enjoy each other's company through good times and bad for the rest of your lives, it's a marriage. See how the sex of the parties involved just doesn't come into it?
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
Like the GM said, i understand where theyre coming from, but you need to look out for others.
If i had heard about two woman getting married that looked like night elves when i was of young age, my mind would have went the wrong way. I would not accept it as two people marrying because they were in love and all of that happy nice stuff. Younger people have no concept of love. They perceive the world with simple views.
To some the situation may be disturbing, or maybe even naughty.
Stop being selfish. Keep the event to yourself. I have no problem with the same sex marriage issue, but no one owes you anything. The fact that you people demand public acceptance turns many off from the idea
Isn't GLBT just 4 letters? I don't see any mention of gay, lesbian, bisexual, nor transgender. So, first of all, the offended has to interpret those 4 letters in a way that is offensive. How many ways can you interpret WTB [copper rod]x1 PST? (And on a side note, though ianal, Blizzard will settle the upcoming discrimination lawsuits. I can't wait to be offended!)
The original story wasn't about "gay marriage." Why is it now? Someone advertised their guild relative to a sexual preference, about as out of place in a fantasy RPG as advertising a guild relative to they type of car you drive or your political leaning. Trying to shift it over to a gay marriage issue isn't going to solve anything.
The acronym "GBLT" stands for "Gay-Bi-Lesbian-Transgendered". Let's break it down. In this reference, "gay" isn't refering to people who are happy and joyful, it's referring to men who have sex with each other, particularly anal and oral sex. If this point were to have been made in a public chat channel in an online RPG like WoW, Blizzard's reaction would have been understood. Trying to hide this behind a politically correct acronym doesn't change the meaning of "gay" in the context it's used in. Ditto for "lesbian" and "bi". "Transgendered" is potentially more offensive, as it often refers to people who have undergone surgery to change their sex without some underlying medical reason. Even if the procedure is innocent (the person is a hermaphrodite to one extent or another and is choosing what sex they want to be physically), it still doesn't have a place being broadcast in a public chat channel in an online RPG like WoW.
Let's look at the other side of the coin. A guild decides it's going to advertise itself as not "straight-only" but "straight-friendly". This is just as unacceptable. It's making a reference to sex that doesn't belong in the context of the game. By zeroing in on being "straight", you are making direct references to acts of sex, something I get quite enough of on television and radio. We're playing this game to get AWAY from RL issues for a little while. Please, don't bring your RL issues with you.
Why is it that every time I offer a differing viewpoint from what should be *PC* or if I don't instantly agree with the article I get modded troll? Yes, I know I can be harsh with my words. However in no way was I attacking anyone in general. I don't care if homosexuals marry each other in the game. I think it's stupid that Blizzard would not allow such a thing. But why am I not allowed to voice my opinion when I say marrying in a video game is stupid in general? I thought this was a site with such *great* discussions, yet every time there is someone with the slightest negative comment, whether it is constructive or not (as I believe mine was) they usually get modded troll. Mods need to stop playing favorites and being biased, this site is supposed to be unbiased so that all opinions and views are shown. If I think it's stupid that people marry in a video game, I should have every fucking right to voice that opinion (without fear of being modded troll.) It's not like I posted something like "OMG TEH NERDS WANT tO Get MARRIED LOLZ!!!1" When I said Give it some time, and people will be requesting to marry their pet / minion / whatever screaming "IT'S MY RIGHT DAMNIT! I only meant to inject the post with some stale humor, not to offend any fans of beastiality. I heartfully respect your right to play with animals, although it may be illegal in some states.
The most important factor in a healthy family is how the members treat each other. Especially important is how the parents treat the kids, since this treatment is the model from which all other family behaviors will be formed.
Neither gender is more significant than the other. They are both insignificant compared to treatment.
The number of parents is not as significant either. One parent, two, three, four....the number doesn't matter (I know several people raised in four-parent families, as a result of divorces and remarriages, so it happens).
If you have one good parent who manages to treat you well while juggling work responsibilities (not saying this is easy or anything) you will grow up to be a sane, emotionally balanced person.
If you have two good parents of the same gender, you will turn out just fine.
If you have two parents of different genders who treat you like crap, you will be messed up.
That is consistent with what I have seen, anyway.
I've been following this story across several forums and newsites and I hope to shed some light on why this is the case.
As the subject suggests, it's about the money. While using words like fag and homo may be offesnsive to homosexual people, the same level of offense could be felt by non-tollerant hetrosexual people so BLizzard, to keep as many customers as possible, takes a neutral stance. They don't allow non-tollerants to make durogatory remarks to and/or about homosexuals and they keep homosexual appearances in game (such as GLBT guild ads and same sex marriages) banned.
This is one of those "squeaky wheel gets the oil" situations. I play Guild Wars with a couple ex-WoW players whose accounts were banned because they called other people fags when they saw them do something stupid. But as we've seen in the past the homosexual community is less secure in modern society so they scream or "squeak" louder when they are offended then hetrosexuals so that they can draw attention to the discrimination against them and support for homosexual society changes.
I never single someone out for "the way they were born."
And no one was ever born "transgendered."
...in the game if not gay? are 20-somethings who sit in their parents' basment playing games that are FEMALE???? And where can I get a list of names, and IM handles?
Damn! There goes my drive to recruit TRS-80 Color Computer fans.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
There are people that believe married couples shouldn't have anal sex. There are people that believe they have been abducted by aliens. There are people who believe that the Rockefellers and the Russians killed JFK.
I doubt there's any belief too fantastic that at least someone accepts it. The key issue here is whether there's any foundation to a belief. If a belief is without foundation, then, while I accept an individual's right to adopt it, I sure the hell don't want it creeping its way into public policy.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It's "legal" to "kill" people there, unlike in reality, but same sex marriage is not - unlike here.
Don't like it? Don't play.
End of story.
I'm all for equal rights, but this is not reality we're talking about - it's an alternative game world with it's own physics, laws, customs, etc - if you desperately want to be married in game but can't be due to the law or whatever, then *roleplay* that oppressed minority group in game.
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Let's get even more exact, with the target of the actions.
A child can't consent to sex because their minds aren't ready for the concept that is sexual intercourse. The effects of forcing sex on someone who isn't ready can be disasterous.
A person getting beat up or possibly murdered because of their skin tone, I would bet, doesn't like the fact that they're getting pummeled.
The other person in a homosexual relationship is aware of what they're doing, and they feel pleasure and possibly *love* for the person they're having sex with.
Two of these have undesirable outcomes for one or both of the parties involved. The third one doesn't.
The three aren't comparable.
All it takes for one to accept homosexual marriage is maturity?
What about a man and a goat?
Or a brother and sister? How many people on slashdot are 'mature' enough for that?
please
Currently, homosexual marriage is legal. The incoming party wants a new free-conscience vote on the matter. The previous vote, the one which passed the bill, was not a free vote since the NDP and Liberals kicked anyone out of their party who voted against it. While a few people who towed the party line might now vote against it (to a very likely backlash from their constituency), others, who voted against it before will vote for it now since they feel that the country has already spoken on the matter and consider the issue closed even if they personally disagree. Current projections look like a new vote would be passed by a small, not slim, margin. The Globe & Mail, arguably Canada's most respected newspaper, recently had an article on the matter.
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
Can you imagine the poor child with two Tauren daddies? Or two undead mommies?
Shouldn't that be two undead mummies?
It'd be nice if the WoW GMs were as proactive about removing gold farmers, or as responsive about bugged quests/mobs, as they are about ruining the fun of honest players. It really does seem that the worst things about the game are the people running it.
Game... blouses.
"While I do understand where you are coming from, there are those who do not have the maturity" Is it that bad that Blizzard needs to worry about the lowest common denominator of "those not having the maturity"?
Asheron's Call let us marry same-sex :)
:(
Too bad there is noone left there to marry
and i dont believe marriage is even done anymore, not sure noone to marry, hehe.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." - G.K. Chesterton
People are selfish. Why?
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
People defend "GLBT-friendly" - would they defend "Aryan-friendly" or "pedo-friendly" as much as they do "GLBT-friendly?"
Nice. These comparisons of GLBT players wanting to be free from harassment from the immature players, to white supremacists and child predators, are not winning you any friends on the other side of the debate. Do you think you could come up with something a little less insulting, or do you just want to piss people off?
Edith Keeler Must Die
A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?"
Homosexuality is not a religion. A better analogy is, "would anyone care if there was a heterosexual friendly guild(note that it still allows homosexuals, just so long as they're supportive of and friendly to heterosexuals, and don't use derogatory terms that a reasonable hetero would find offensive)?"
And the answer is "yes." Some people would be offended by that, because some people are asses. Just like anyone who takes offense at the GLBT friendly guilds is an ass.
Wandering OT, I do wonder if Blizzard would permit guilds that are open about their non-Christian beliefs, and actively recruit members of their respective religions? Or would they want to ban them, so as to prevent people from harassing them?
Others find it hard to be tolerant of a group they see as violating 'the laws of God'. You're asking *them* to be tolerant, why shouldn't it be expected of *you* as well?
Tough shit. someone else violating God's law doesn't get you dead.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
So, it's your contention that (a) sex between consenting adults is equivalent to sex with a non-sentient animal, and (b) sex is the defining characteristic of marriage?
Hey, if the deceased agrees in advance (they do have a say in what happens to their body, don't you think?) and the family agrees, well, you and your "friend" can go have yourselves a time.
Again, is it your serious position that sex with a consenting adult is equivalent with sex with a dead body, and that sex is the defining characteristic of marriage?
Fine... if the deceased agrees before hand, chow down.
Again... you know the rest...
My only concerns with incest are the increased danger of birth defects, and the potential for abuse when family members of different authority levels (father/daughter, father/son, etc.) interact.
Aside from the potential for abuse, I agree.
Are you just playing "devil's advocate"?
It's a perfectly valid question. Why'd you assume "white-friendly" meant white supremacists? The same for pedo-friendly and child predators? Using the same leap of logic you used to go from white-friendly to white supremacists one could go from GLBT-friendly to GLBT Only, right? That's the original poster's intent, was it not? To show that leap of logic occurs for other terms, thus it could occur with this one and thus Blizzard was in the right for not allowing it in their general chat.
If a group truly wishes its members to have the
rights of other individuals, and not be treated
differently, then they should not organize themselves
into an exclusionary orginization. Doing so only brings out
the big flashing arrow pointing to your group, saying:
"Hey we're different and that's ok!"
"Look at us! Look how different we are! You need to be ok with it!"
"You need to be afraid of us if you disagree with us."
"We will decide how you should refer to us as a group, and it will change every
so often without notice."
"The _public institution_ needs to give us money to run our group or the
_public institution_ is bad/evil/morally wrong"
etc.
Perhaps it seems counterintuitive, but lobbying for
_fillinblank_ rights just invites _fillinblank_ hatred.
Someday someone will start a fake organization as a social
experiment to verify this.
Wow
The difference between GLBT , Aryan Nations and Pedophiles is simple.
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender .
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born.
"The Knights of the Argent Hood are recruiting! We're a light RP guild with an emphasis on raids, PvP and large group hunts. We're friendly to Christians and whites, but open to all."
Acceptable, or no?
Tell me, how does one go about "promoting sexual attraction?" There are hundreds of thousands of slashdotters who would pay a LOT of money for that kind of information...
All I'm saying is if you send 40 male dwarfs down into a mine for a month, all alone, something is going to happen. And then when Hurin Little-Too-Manly and Glib Lightboots finally emerge from the mine and return home, if you don't let them talk about things and work out their feelings with their family, the shit is going to hit the fan.
If the moderators of WoW are so concerned about "maturity" then why are they so willingly peddling a game that advocates violence and even goes so far as to allow for "mature" things like marriage? Are they sure that most/all of the players are mature enough to respect the union of marriage but NOT understand love? To me it seems like they're negligent of the problems to which they're contributing -- mainly, the idea that marriage is a fad, nothing more.
Sure, WoW is a fantasy-based game, but you can't take the human component out of it. By disallowing things and concepts that exist in every-day they're imposing a judgement which will negatively influence some players of the game. It certainly won't help to make people more mature.
No, no. Real world groups.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
I don't know what the hell you think "Aryan" means, but Aryan refers to people who are native to Iran and those Indians with primarily Persian ancestry (those descended from traditional Nobility, often with lighter skin than other Indians). Saying that they all "advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation" is the most racist thing I've read on this channel so far. Sure, the state of Iran does advocate violence against others based on religious affiliation, but judging a whole race by that is simply bigotry of the worst kind.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
They're not forcing you to buy the game. If you don't agree with it, don't buy it. Let the profits speak rather than worrying over it here.
His name is Dan Quayle, you moron.
Keep in mind that I was talking about you going to court to prove you're married. If you are on trial and you needed to prove that you're actually married to your wife, refusing to kiss her would probably be a bad start. Considering that it is customary to kiss during a wedding ceremony (and implied that you'll be doing much more soon after), you can't tell me that it's somehow an indecent request. Besides, we were talking about you fake marrying your roommates. You wouldn't have any proof at all that you're married!
Gays are allowed to join the army. They just aren't allowed to talk about it.
The problem is that don't ask don't tell stigmatizes being gay.
Totally incorrect comparison that illustrates a lack of understanding of real wow rules. Gays are not banned from forming a guild for themselves. They just cannot openly advertise in the general channel annoying everyone. They can advertise on the online guild recruitment board.
A more accurate comparison to the diner example would be. You have a table with 3 gay peoples. They decide to stand up on their chair and SCREAM so that everyone in the vicinity can hear them to join their table of gay people. Most guild recruiters don't advertise once on the general channels in the game. As it'd be lost pretty fast. The gays in your diner would be annoying your other patrons once every minute.
Would you kick them out if they didn't stop then?
Hmmm... Pie...
bilateral, with both testicles removed. As in, he no longer has the organs necessary to make sperm, at all. He is totally sterile; biology tells us he can't have children. He beat huge odds, and is still around nearly a decade later. He married a nurse he met while in the hospital. They now have 4 kids, all after they got married. None from his sperm, all 4 of them are very much his kids. They are wonderful parents, he is a wonderful father. I have several friends who are in committed gay couples, with children. Same story; they may be sterile with each other, but that is no barrier to them having kids together, any more than mutual sterility was to the het couple above. And they are wonderful parents; they had to work at it to ahve kids, and they WANT and deeply love and work hard at raising their kids. Dude, if your biology argument has any validity, then the first guy should no more be married or have kids than the gay couples. He clearly should. Therefore, no validity. And I'm workign hard to be polite here.
So... You're saying 3-way marriage should be okay too, then?
:)
Surprised your innate bigotry didn't lead you to the goat argument.
However, considering the word Marriage comes basically comes from a term meaning, you have a significant other, or the union of TWO things, three wouldn't really be a marriage...
Oh, should I mention the word marriage comes from French? That should make all the neo-cons hate it...
Wow, I was just beginning to believe this was the 21st century. Oh wait, it is for the rest of us...
In your temporal 'reality' do women still get to vote or is that forbidden also?
It doesn't seem like the 'is gay marriage in a mmorpg ok' should be debated until 'is homosexuality in a mmorpg ok' is or 'is gay adoption acceptable'. Most people don't step back enough and look at the underlying issues.
There's already been the whole, well why can't a man and a cat get married and adopt a child. If the man loves the the cat and the cat seems to recipricate who's to say it's wrong? Then it becomes, where do you draw the line between ethical relationships and sexual perversion. Since no one can come up with a good answer, the majority feeling wins.
How about this issue, what age is the minimum for a marrital relationship. In most "first-world" cultures 17 or 18 is the minimum. So is it wrong for a 14yr old girl in the Amazon to marry a 30yr old man? Another case of wehre you draw the line between ethical behavior and sexual/cultural perversion.
Should two gay men be allowed to adopt a girl? What affect would having no female parent have on the girl growing up? Would it be similar to the affect of a single father raising a daughter? Despite the fact that the two men may love and care for the girl, who can be sure that there would be no female identity issues psychologically.
When children are involved it becomes a strongly debated issue, should gay marriage and adoptions be allowed at the cost of literally treating children like psychological guinea pigs seeing whether it affects them or not? There's no current hard studyings on the issue except in the case of the two parent vs single parent studies.
Enough of the speech. My opinion.
I don't care what sexual perverts do, if you think two guys making out is acceptable behavior fine that's your right, BUT when you infringe on the rights of children making them part of your life style experiment I HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH THAT. If you want to play the, 'It feels good and it's not hurting anyone game' fine but don't get kids involved.
As for WoW and blizzards decision:
If the game is rated, so only people above the age of 17 should be playing, then blizzard was wrong.
If the game is rated teen, then blizzard made the right decision.
Gay is abnormal. The purpose is in the name, repoductive organs. Try to deny all you like, mothernature deems hetero normal. The why can be genetic screw up or fucked in the head but it doesn't change the situation. It's not an "alternate style" of life. Trying to pawn it off as such is denying reality. Might as well teach them intelligent design.
Absolutely.
This is a private company however, so they can do what they like.
It is disappointing that their game masters view a gay relationship as potentially offensive though.
When will they allow Alliance vs Alliance in BG? Then people could settle their differences on the field!
AMEN BROTHER
You've opened up one of the biggest cans of worms in Theology, but C.S. Lewis covered it quite succinctly in pointing out that no, the church is not God, but the church is probably a whole lot more qualified to interpret God's will, since two milleniums of millions of minds is probably better than a year or two of one mind. Don't get me wrong, independant thinking is great, but you shouldn't just "screw the middleman" and toss out all that accumulated wisdom. That would be like saying "screw the middleman" with science and not reading any textbooks or listining to any teachers, and instead just trying to prove the whole thing from Newton to Einstein from scratch. Sure you can try, but chances are you'll get something pretty far off from reality. Take everyone else's knowledge, learn about it, add your own thoughts, and decide for yourself. Don't just jump straight ahead to deciding.
These games are played by a lot of teenagers. An important part of their growing up is assuming male/female roles.
Correction: An important part of them growing up is allowing them to assume a role that is compatible with who they are. A parent that can't allow this has no business parenting. Parenting isn't about ownership, nor is it about creating a mirror image of oneself.
Maybe some of us are just tired of gays pushing their immorality into our entertainment, and think it is time to push back.
Pusing their immorality? Could you elaborate on what is immoral about a homosexual orientation?
A lot of sexual taboos against things like S&M
What does this have to do with a homosexual orientation?
When creative bright people don't have children because they are gay
As opposed to creative, bright people who are straight but choose not to have children? A bit of a double standard, no?
Too many people lack the courage to say anything about it.
Most likely because there is nothing courageous about it. It's much harder to face the truth.
Look at the Catholic Church's history. It is filled with corruption and greed. Whatever deal you broker with your God has to be better than the inquisition. You 1 Church 0
What I wrote was: "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild."
Then in a different part of the post, covering a general principle, not the specifics of this: "People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation."
Suggesting that I actually wrote "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly... discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation" was inaccurate.
I assume you were trying to suggest that a policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation didn't necessarily cover discriminating on the basis of views about sexual orientation. I disagree. I don't find it acceptable to use words like "gay" or "faggot" as insults, even if the person using those words honestly holds the view that those are insults. There's no place for those words as insults in that product, in my opinion. Regardless of the guild.
If someone is using "gay" and "faggot" slung around as insults in a different Guild, I'd like to see action taken against them for their inappropriate conduct.
I see creating a guild which discriminates the other way as just more discrimination and not helpful.
Yes, there are lots of unpleasant or clueless people around. Better to get them out of the game. Maybe they would learn something from it.
I honestly don't know which side to take on this issue. On the one hand, private organizations can pretty much do what they please. On the other, it's kind of shady.
When you think about it more, most forums ban this type of thing too. Most forums actually just ban the word "gay" because of how often it's used as an insult.
But right now...I am struggling to just care the slightest bit. I mean really, I could care less. I'm sorry gay people. I urge to assist in your cries for peaceful gaydom, but....I just....watching...star trek...
Apologies for the length of time it took to get this information out to you.
w ow-general&t=6845080&s=blizzard&tmp=1#blizzard
We encourage community building among our players with others of similar interests, and we understand that guilds are one of the primary ways to forge these communities. However, topics related to sensitive real-world subjects -- such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example -- have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment.
To promote a positive game environment for everyone and help prevent such harassment from taking place as best we can, we prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast. This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community Web site, serves as one open avenue for doing so.
We will be clarifying some of the language in our game policies in order to help avoid such confusion in the future.
Caydiem WoW Comunity Manager
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=
from: meronkun
to: marc
wow.
maybe i wasnt clear on my point?
or maybe you just refuted it in a small sentence, which you did.
here's your sentence which refuted my point:
Either that or, someone in blizzard actually thinks that having open gays and lesbians will ruin sales - since when? Its still the biggest MMO ever, and will be for a long time.
but here's my point, also in your words:
I was applying for jobs, and a lot of people wouldn't hire me since they were looking for a woman (waitress, counterperson) even when I asked, they specified, "sorry, we're looking for a girl". So that's illegal, however, I say that, and its like, "okay, no biggie".
the restaurant or whatever, of course, wouldnt hire you because having a waitress suits their financial interests betters. you understand that, in your own way, and no one should give a fuck about what the law says is wrong or right in this country.
my point is still that blizzard, in its gm interaction, and then its official policy, is acting like the restaurant. "real world sensitive topics" i.e. open homosexuals, are not allowed on the server. you know what this is saying? it's saying: WOW is not a place to promote social discussion , progress, or conversation. WOW is actually prohibited to have social significance, as by that rule about the clearing of real world sensitive topics from open conversation. this is to respect that WOW is a money making machine.
to this, my only point, you stated the above refutation, i think you said something like "since when? WOW would still be big" for one thing, i think you underestimate the power of greed. but i dont need to prove that, just look at anything at all and take it in.
now let me make it a little more concrete, by a small example:
if parents, the same half of the country that voted for bush only for their fear of legalization of same sex marriages despite their other grievances with the bush administration, do not trust the world of warcraft for fear of the unregulated social activity and dangerous ideas, well then you lose that half the country, and all their children , as paying subscribers. right?
so my point is , blizzards policy on harrassment, as they referred to when dealing with this issue, is nothing other than saying we don't want you we're looking for a waitRESS to attract more customers. it is only in blizzards GREAT financial interest that they invoke this policy. it makes it a safe place for children to have their parents pay to subscribe. and not only that, in a democracy, the status quo is also the far greater buying power, DONT YOU KNOW.
my anger with blizzard is that they confuse good people like you by calling it an ethical standpoint, or a moral issue, and now all the people on the forums think blizzard was trying to do their moral best.
no , they weren't.
if they spelled it like it is, they would tell you exactly what i said right now. but you know what? then they'd be acting illegally, and would be sued by everyone, which is why they call it a harrassment policy and not a make money by protecting the status quo policy. so they are acting in their own financial interest by lying about acting in their own financial interest. its all understandable, its the usual crap.
i'm not ANGRY marc, in an uproar way, really. i'm just really fucking disappointed. i just really wanted to know that a new industry would be different from the same crap as the rest of the country. of course not. its just so boring when this happens. it makes me stop caring. couldnt things have been cooler?
WOW might have been a beautiful CREATION,
but as music and movies goes,
the environment gets ruined by money.
blame it on the company,
blame it on subscription models for social universes,
blame it on capitalism.
whatever
I think he meant it as a joke. There's no need to expose your insecurities here--many people might find their apparent knee-jerk manifestations to be more offensive than the original comment.
Well, as half of the abovementioned heterosexual-in-real-life couple playing a same-sex couple in WoW, I'm amused that this little anecdote made it all the way to Slashdot.
Honestly, my husband and I didn't have any political intentions with our characters. We never had a pretend wedding. We just both happened to be playing female night elves (my husband wasn't interested in playing The Incredible Purple Hulk), and since we occasionally joke around in a semi-flirtateous manner, decided they were a couple. We never had a problem with other players on our RP server. We just acted like we do in real life anyway, none of those emoted snogging sessions in Stormwind that appear popular with a number of hetero couples (gaak).
I admit that I got pretty riled up when I heard about the gay guild getting a warning, and Blizzard's wussy response to the issue. Our guild, which is gay-friendly and has a number of not-straight members, started contacting GMs to get clarification about what the new policy would mean for LGBT players, both those who might mention their real life same sex partners and those who might role-play a same-sex relationship. The conversation linked above was between one of my guildmates and a GM... he used our characters as an example.
Right now, I suspect that Blizzard is consulting with their Lawyerbots on TOS changes. I am curious what those changes will be, and I'm holding back on cancelling for now. If I have to agree to a TOS that allows open hetero identity but not open homo identity among players, I'm just saying no and cancelling. I may be in a straight relationship, but I'm not putting up with that kind of bull.
If you were sincerely interested you would learn how to use Google or the myriad search engines that exist. You wouldn't just beg, "links?"
The correlation/causality arguments over what families produce 'better' children are tired. Generally, the more committed and loving adults a child has access to the better they turn out (I don't have to link you to substantiate this), because, generally, more adults equals more time and support and unless you are a sociopath you'd agree that children do better with more adult attention and supervision.
If two available parents is sufficient, would you agree that a child is better off with access to two parents and one or more grandparents? How about two parents, one or more grandparents, and one or more aunts and uncles? How about the addition of adult cousins, committed social groups (e.g., churches) and invested mentors (e.g., teachers)?
If more adults are better-- then two daddies is better than no daddies... But...
We haven't outlawed single-parent families (following my argument, the 'worst' arrangement possible), so why would we outlaw families with even more available adults?
Every time I hear "outlaw gay marriage, for the children!", I have to ask the proponent if they also want to outlaw divorce "for the children" (and widowing, bring on the compulsory marriage/adoption). It's the only consistent position. If you take the argument to the extreme, you'd also have to desire birthrate quotas (so there are suitable, legislated ratios of parents to children in all families).
Of course, libertarians (and I thought "conservatives", too) want the fucking governments out of our lives -- and by extension, out of our familes, and by extension, out of our bedrooms and out of our marriages, etc.
Remember when interracial marriages weren't legal. Disclaimer: I have an interracial marriage.
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
Well , Aryan as a term is explicitly linked with Racism in this day and age . To use the term outside of an anthropological discussion is like using the word Gay to mean happy and carefree .
The term normally used to avoid such associations is proto-Indo-Iranian/European
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Check out Megatokyo's take on this. Back when Piro first finds out he's been playing as a female character against the "darkly cute" Miho. As Miho puts it, "Don't you think our mutual confusion is rather interesting? Especially considering the rather 'intimate' nature of our in-game relationship?"
because Aryan is a hijacked term , and it doesn't mean white anyway .Proto-Indo-Iranian/European has displaced the term due to the Nazi.
You will not hear the term used outside of Anthropological discussions , even then it will most likely be replaced as it is not that descriptive.
See many people have the Aryan = White thing hammered into their head due to the propaganda , which is another reason the term was replaced.
How many people would use the word Negro to describe a black person these days , not many , or Yid or kike to describe a Jewish person (from Yiddish and the term used to designate Eastern European Jewish immigrants , used by Western European Jewish immigrants )
I know I would be fairly Irritated if someone called me a Kike , Yid I don't mind so much , I love Yiddish .
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Children play this game, too. They don't need to load up WoW just to see /yell Gay men ony club recruiting. We take tops and bottoms!
/yell PieEaters guild now recruiting! We are men that like to eat pussy!
You allow that kind of shit and Blizzard will definately be getting letters from parents.
Faggots just need to learn that they dont need to advertise their sexual preferences.
I have yet to see in WoW,
So, stfu fag.
Divorce is often a better option. When parents hate each other's guts, it's better to get divorced. Divorce doesn't mean that the father (or mother) instantly forgets about the kids he (she) left behind. Divorce is also unavoidable. The situation where a gay couple adopts a kid IS avoidable and SHOULD BE avoided for the sake of the kid. The kid can not make an informed decision. He/she should not be forced into a family that has abnormal and distorted (men aren't technically designed to have sex with men, you know) values and sexual preferences.
You just completely missed the "middle man" pun there, didn'tcha?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
...at least in France, where you can choose several marriages type, one being "communal" where all money and belongings gained during the duration of the marriage do belong equally to both, BUT another type is "separate", where nothing is shared, ie both money and goods are attributed to one person only. in-between arrangements are possible if you have a good lawyer and an tax expert on hand.
My understanding, and that of the majority I'm sure, is that the fiscal advantages of marriage are to compensate for the cost of raising children, and the legal guarantees linked to marriage to prevent one spouse for bieng left in the lurch in case of the death or departure of the other.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
"You have a table with 3 gay peoples. They decide to stand up on their chair and SCREAM so that everyone in the vicinity can hear them to join their table of gay people."
Yeah, since everyone else is also "screaming" it's kind of moot. What, you never hear anyone tlak about Chuck Norris?
" Most guild recruiters don't advertise once on the general channels in the game. "
There is a constant stream of guild recruipment going on in WoW.
If you are on a server that doesn't have recruitment and other non-game topics spamming the screen, please tell me the name so I can create a character there.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The only guild I've ever been in was an EQ Uberguild. The only interaction I had, or desired, from them was raid progression. Most of them were not people I wanted to really know anyway. We were bound together by a common goal, committed to doing our best to achieve it, and had some ego associated with being better than other guilds AT THE GAME. I came to WoW precisely because such guilds were too needy (upset that some of us couldn't log on for 6 hours a night to sit in a heal chain, every night). WoW is more casual, the time commitment is less, but it is still a game with clear objectives. I guess if I ever felt compelled to raid in WoW I'd join a guild that just wanted to be good raiders (or PvPers), not start a political action committee. Penny Arcade is really an example of my point, those guys and their readers are really in to gaming, they're united by that one cause, and that's why it works. I doubt their readers are homogenous in any other way, that is exactly the kind of attitude that belongs.
/., blogs etc. It would seem any policy that Blizzard adopts on the subject is suitable, provided it reinforces a positive competitive dynamic. This stuff does not belong in the game, can quickly turn it poisonous, and only hurts. While it would be correct to ban any guild not centered around the GAME, it's probably only practical to target the biggest offenders (which from what I see are GLBT and Christian Guilds). Really if you're playing the game yet still identifying so strongly with some RL concept, it tells me the game is not interesting to you and you aren't going to take it seriously. Like any other game, the only time you really can play BADLY is if you aren't trying your best. Sensible people, except maybe the jocks we all hated in school, can tolerate and even defend people who don't play well, but have 0 tolerance of those who show up to waste time. I can't see why Blizzard, who has to maintain the integrity of the game including the inter-player dynamics that are built by guilds, would take any other stance except turn a total blind eye to it and hope that hatred will cause all the malcontents to eventually quit.
I don't see how GLBT, or any other RL junk-topic has any place in WoW, that's for IRC, IM,
Personally I think the wiser choice is to be public and firm before people get too entrenched. Some will quit, but they're probably going to quit anyway. Better to see that few go before they get supporters, or worse, copy cats in other guilds.
Ok...maybe I am a little confused here. Why is there such an outrage and suprised reaction to this? Is it because everyone forgot how Blizzard(Vivendi) acted with the bnetd thing in favor for their latest shiney toy (WoW). What the hell? I thought we established some years ago that Blizzard sold out to a profit mongering monster (Vivendi). Given that homosexual partners (even in game where straight partners can pretend to be gay) are a very small percentage of the population, and homophobic people are the larger percentage...is anyone really surprised that they would defend the larger portion of the fee paying populace? This isn't some grand civil rights movement here, this is a purely profit driven move. Please wake up everyone, go outside, live life, turn off the video game, and if you are really offended by this behavior...for god's sake fight this battle where it means something...IN REAL LIFE...not in some stupid video game. I mean for christ's sake...this is a battle at the highest level of courts in the US with the president trying to ammend the US constitution to ban gay marriages and people are crying foul at a video game? GO OUTSIDE! People wonder why nothing gets done to stop these sorts of things from happening in real life...while so many people spend their time and energy screaming about how their virtual worlds are being oppressed.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Man, it's not about who you like to fuck. It's about who you are drawn to fall in love with. Have you never seen a gay couple in love? It kind of does define a big part of their life. The same way our straight relationships are so important to us.
nt
And anyway you look at it, people describing themselves as "white" are not really white, but rather pink-ish. Then again, "Pink Power" sounds kind of cute...
Here's some irony for you. I know three people who are all romantically involved with each other (1 male, 2 female) who play WoW together. So in a way I suppose that's not a complete non-issue.
-Cybrex
Boundless Expansion, Self-Transformation, Dynamic Optimism, Intelligent Technology, Spontaneous Order- BEST DO IT SO!
Do I start to care that imaginary beings have no rights?
Or do I start to care that people who charge other people to pretend to be imaginary beings care that those imaginary beings should have no rights?
I'm not going to spend another synaptic activation on it.
Lucky Pierre!
Property law should use #'EQ, not #'EQUAL.
The Net Avenger saves the day again! Except that your rant of justice was directed at a harmless joke... oops.
I'm on the side of tolerance too, but by going off half-cocked like this, you're not opening anyone's mind. I think you need to ask yourself what your real movtivation was for posting this. Were you trying to make the world a better place, or were you venting some of your own personal rage?
I'm far from perfect myself, and I've posted my share of angry tirades in my day as well. But I never managed to convince anyone that way. That kind of tone just convinces the bigots of the world that they are right. And when you're so eager to let them have it that you don't even bother to take the time to be sure you comprehend the true intent of the person you're talking to, you really make the progressive cause look bad.
I'm sure you're a great guy, and I'm not trying to make you feel bad. I'm just suggesting that you would further our cause more by using somewhat different tactics.
Hey, the hethens had Jerusalem, and by God (literally) if you cant go to war over the Middle East, why, what CAN you go to war over?
Yeah, it's pretty sad that so much brainpower has been wasted through mankind's history on a meme which, almost by definition, can never be connected with any kind of objective reality..
About the only thing that such thought has been good for is occasionally coming up with some simple rules on how people should treat each other to try and improve the human condition, but those rules could have easily been arrived at without the need to invoke anything supernatural as motivation - just plain old common sense and an appreciation for history.
So, by the same logic, you must be saying straight people bring their "drama" into everything from dating games on TV to online games, too. You're amazingly blind to how pervasive heterosexism is in your culture if you think gay marriage in an online game is "shoving" an ideology down your throat but that straight marriage in the same environment is a given.
Oh, and if this is really the case:
hate speech... is acceptable to Blizzard unless it is reported, which only warrants a warning.
I say the thing to do about it would be to spam Blizzard with reports, and keep logs of your reports. For instance, if you know a player has been reprimanded, and you see it happen again, you report them again. Do it enough, and it will no longer be profitable for Blizzard to tolerate hate speech while pretending they don't.
They don't have to ban everyone, stepping things up slowly would be an easy way to train people not to use these forms of speech.
And once the problem is gone that way, you ask for your GLBT clan again.
By the way:
To say there would be no homosexuals in a world with 'humans' or other intelligent beings is against the evidence we have today.
Not only true of humans, but homosexuality has been observed quite often in the animal kingdom as well -- which kills the argument that it's "unnatural". The only remaining argument is that we should be "above" it, because it's "immoral", and those who can't help the attraction should simply never act on it. Well, folks, if you replace "GLBT" with "Masturbation" or "Pornography", you realize how impractical that is -- there are plenty of people who believe masturbation is immoral without being able to stop, which is why confession is so popular -- if you confess your lewd thoughts, they don't matter anymore, right?
In any case, IT DOESN'T MATTER. There are some areas where morality gets fuzzy, where even "Don't be evil" Google gets attacked no matter what they do, but this is a hands down, black-and-white, open-and-shut case where any sane, rational person can see how wrong Blizzard is about this, and how it could be made right.
I smell a class-action lawsuit...
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I'd say *no one* has no business legislating what goes on in the bedroom of consenting adults. unless you're in the same bedroom... wouldn't you say?
Ummmm.... Great thread to start on a Friday after the regular folks have gone home for the weekend. What a load of crap. Blizzard couldn't care one way or the other. The link to the GM conversation is someone's blog that doesn't even involve any of the original parties!! Sorry--but these seems more like one individials means to obtain attention more than a valid story. I've dealt with enough GM's to know what the answer would be to someone complaining about gay marriage--"Go back to playing the game, we'll investigate..."
Woah.. what the hell?
/ignore capability.
When have you Ever had a homosexual attempt to convert you to your 'inner gay'? Turn off the TV once in a while and interact with Real people.
I've known several homosexuals and the closest I ever got was a proposition from a guy who thought I was attractive. The proposition was in no way predatory and he dropped it when I declined.*
While I am shocked and disappointed in some of the things I've read in this thread, such as the parent poster, there are other replies that I find quite refreshing. None of what I consider the positive replies attempt to convert anyone to anything. They speak of tolerance for others and reflect on how society changes by bringing up issues that were previously taboo and are now accepted. The negative replies are full of hyperbole and ignorance.
I guess that's how you were raised. My condolances. I hope you encounter people in your lifetime that show you your point of view may be incorrect and you give them the opportunity to do so.
On (the original) Topic:
Blizzard has the right to determine what subjects can and cannot be discussed in the game.
I do not agree with their choices and would rather they address issues of persecution when/if they arise and allow their customers to form the social communities that make them comfortable. This has the side effect of bringing the players back and paying more monthly fees. I would like to note that a player would have to go to extreme lengths to harass another player due to the simple
* I am male, heterosexual, and of the mind that there is no possible way to argue that homosexual marriage is in any way harmful to anyone anywhere.
Since most of the female characters in game are actually male players, 'gay' marriage is more common than you think...
I don't get it. Why would a "neo-con" attach any political significance to word origins? Any educated person knows that we have thousands of words descended from Old or Middle French, which in turn mostly come from Latin, which in turn mostly come from Indo-European. I guess that this is relevant to the debate, though. In real life, when you're talking about two different things, is it appropriate to use the same word for both, or is it better to use a new word or term for the second, in order to avoid confusion? Does it take away the right of a person to do a thing by naming it differently?
More importantly, in the context of the video game, which is based largely on medieval lore, does it make sense to turn the game into a battleground for homosexual relationships? I mean, people play games to escape real life, not to have 21st-century politics brought into the game. If the GMs allow this kind of thing to creep in and take over the game, the company is ultimately going to lose participants and money. It isn't that people hate or even disagree with a lifestyle, it's just that most people want to play a game without turning it into an afternoon on talk radio.
Not everything has to be about sexuality. There's much more to life.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: That averages about 660,000,000 of each kind.
when told of blizzard's wow not allowing same sex marriage a reverend from missouri was quoted as saying 'See even satan is opposed to same sex marriages! burn in hell you queer heathens!'
I love double negatives :)
Here in Spain same gender marriage is legal and Blizzard thinks they can legislate on morality?
DON'T PANIC
Put differently, if your statement really was meant ironically, it means you think WoW players don't get romanticly involved at all. By implying it anyway, you introduce a sarcastic contradiction known as irony. Thus, the first remark of this comment is an ironic one.
Please. You reference a USA law in 1877 and tell us this is the universal rationale / legal basis for marriage. I don't believe you. Can you back up your argument with earlier references? In the USA 1877 might represent a long time ago but for a lot us in other cultures that's recent history. Roman literature talks of marriages ("matrimonium" - legal between Roman citizens and some non-citizen Latins). Ancient Egypt had marriages ("shep en shemet"). I think you're trolling. Of course I'd welcome you correcting me by referencing older legal documents that 1877, e.g. older than the Roman Lex Canuleia (445 B.C.).
We cannot even decide on the merits of same-sex marriage in the REAL world and you expect people to be able to do it in a FANTASY one? It is their game, they make the rules. If you don't like it, don't play. It is really that simple. Get over it people.
The bad part of this trend (act -> identity) is that gay people are themselves victims of their own propaganda. The Onion got it spot on with their satirical article. The gay community is so anxious to be given equal rights that they're actively labelling themselves. They are no longer regular people who have sex with same-gender partners. They are people who have sex with same-gender partners who also happen to have jobs, etc.
Just as I don't walk around telling everyong I prefer brunettes to blondes, I don't walk around telling people I prefer women to men for sexual relationships. It's a private part of my life. While important to me and whomever I am going out with at the time, it is no-one else's business. I also have a job, I go to the gym, and have a number of hobbies. There is plenty of other, non-intensely personal subjects on which to discourse.
Why people can't keep their sexual lives to themselves is a bit of a mystery. You wouldn't think it would be that hard . . .
Not many people get married in their bedrooms...
"This is considered plagiarism."
Very true, but somewhat off topic. The problem with the Catholic Church (in medieval times, at least) is that they didn't give a crap and a half about what God thought, just what could get them more power. It wasn't academic at all during certain parts of its history (including the inquisition), just political. Thomas Aquinas' "Summa Theologica," Augustine's "Confessions," and other ancient catholic works can still have plenty of relevance though, because those, like nearly all respectable theological works, weren't written during times of corruption. Keep in mind that I never said we should abandon independant thought, not by any means. I'm saying we should temper it with the accumulated knowledge and wisdom of the Church. By the way, would you lose all faith in science if I told that for thousands of years the leading European scientists believed in spontaneous generation (i.e. maggots spontaneously generating from rotten meat)?
Have you ever mentioned, casually, that you were going to go out with your boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse, while at work or at school?
If so, then congratulations - you've just brought your drama into a place that is not appropriate, according to your statement. The entire world doesn't need to see you parading about your heterosexuality, you drama queen!
Have you ever engaged in a public display of affection - holding hands, a hug, kiss, or other activity while out and about doing something completely unrelated to sex?
If so, then congratulations - you've just brought your drama into a place that is not appropriate, according to your statement. The entire world doesn't need to see you parading about your heterosexuality, you drama queen!
I'm kind of torn - should I look down on you because, like you said, you bring your drama into inappropriate places, or should I look down on you because you do it and you don't have enough personal insight to realize that you're doing it?
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
So, by the same logic, you must be saying straight people bring their "drama" into everything from dating games on TV to online games, too.
You'll get no defense of reality television or MMORPG drama from me, buddy. Sorry to throw a wrench in your argument.
You must be reading a different statement, because I never even mentioned any of those things. Everyone's life has drama. The point is that a private company telling you that you can't bring yours into an online video game does not constitute persecution. Please, come off the cross. Tell me this: what would happen if someone started a "straight pride" guild? What about a white power guild? The same effect, I'm sure. And, I'm sure there would be NO repercussions at all if someone held a "straight pride" parade, right? :rolleyes:
Draw blasphemous cartoons of Muhammad, and you get a number of Muslim countries boycotting your entire country, and widespread rioting. Say pretty much anything you want to about Christians (haha, homophobic, superstitious, clinically retarded crusaders) and... nothing happens. On occasion you might have a Christian complain about you, but nobody cares about them.
This is of course all nonsense. Some of the drawings in question showed Allah to be a bomb toting terrorist. Imagine for a second, the right wing reaction to a similar depiction, of oh we'll say Jesus, by the New York Times. And you want to talk about irrational reactions to other countries? Remember "freedom fries" and "freedom dressing"? And it's not as if Christian groups haven't conducted boycotts here in the U.S. for far less offensive reasons. Remember the Southern Baptists boycotted Disney for years, and Fox News was airing lists of retailers who dared advertize "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".
So this "nobody cares about Christians" hogwash is nothing more than a part of the sad persecution complex that grips some in the U.S. I'd like to get some of these people together and introduce them to a couple of guys I know from Sudan, where Christians and others are slaughtered by the thousands, so they can explain how "opressed" they are when they walk into Wal-Mart and see a "Happy Holidays" sign. I'm sure they'll be very impressed.
How in the bloody fuck is this trolling? I don't believe in the "gay agenda" conspiracy theory, but "gay moderation mafia?" Perhaps.. Nobody is forcing them to pay 14 bucks a month for a game. EQ, EQ2, SWG, and any other number of mmorpgs are waiting in the wings. What they really ought to do is get rid of the stupid concept of marriage in online games altogether, that way nobody can develop a persecution complex.
[...] First off, divorce can easily happen after the children are already raised. Eight years of having a normal family and then divorce is almost certainly better than never having a normal family. No, it's not optimal, but if a marriage leads to divorce, chances are that family life for the children would likely be far worse than a successful marriage. Likewise, even if a parent dies in a normal family, at least the children had a normal family for some period of time. In a gay family, they NEVER had a normal family.
But is a 'normal family' the optimal family? This was basically my question -- but I'll reiterate it: If two parents is good enough, aren't more adults better? And fewer parents worse? (Don't reply unless you answer these questions; I'm not interested otherwise.)
[...] gay couples will never be as good at raising [children] as normal couples. Just because normal families can break down doesn't mean that gay couples should be allowed to raise families. That's like suggesting that just because natural disasters can strike cities, we should build homes on active volcanoes.
First, whether normal families break down is irrelevant. Second, what a terrible analogy. What I'm trying to determine is how having two mothers can possibly be worse than having one parent. I'm trying to have you mention a single shred of evidence that supports the claim that having two parents is worse than having one. (Or to address your tangential point, that a broken/divorced family is superior to a stable/committed family.)
Actually, I don't remember when interracial marriages were illegal, because I was born after 1964. [...] But I really fail to see what that has to do with homosexuality.
So? I'm telling you to remember it, not determining your date of birth. Hrm. Do I explain the obvious parallel between excluding marriage from one set of couples based on discrimination to excluding marriage from one set of couples based on discrimination?
(It's worth noting that the Republican party had more support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than the Democratic party.)
(Why is this worth noting? Are you implying that all conservatives are Republicans? That all Democrats are racist? I don't recall even mentioning political parties or their platforms. I merely mentioned libertarians and conservatives.)
Anyhow, here's an experiement for you:
Take this statement (which was your basic thesis, verbatim), "gay couples will never be as good at raising children as normal couples. Just because normal families can break down doesn't mean that gay couples should be allowed to raise families." Now replace gay with black and normal with white. Then, repeat it to my face, i.e., without the shroud of anonymity and with the spectre of personal responsibility.
Cheers.
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
As long-time miscegenators, my spouse and I have been living in common-law as fully married: a ceremony, rings, only joint accounts and ownership of all the stuff, two children, etc.
:-)
c id=14640215.
Right on, man. We actually have a State marriage license, but I respect your stance.
Look at my post here and the anonymous reply to it: http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176200&
This latest wave of acceptable bigotry incences me.
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
Wow, it sucks that Canada's government doesn't have the guts to do what Blizzard does. Of course, Blizzard has a stupid reason for it (cuz other people will whine? How about cause we don't like people to do that?)
On the other hand, we already have games with robbery, and assault and battery (not to mention murder), etc etc in them, so I guess same-sex marriages wouldn't be all that different...
Except of course that a lot of people seem to think there isn't any problem with same-sex marriages in real life.
Early bird may get the worm.. but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Ever herd the term "have your cake and eat it?"
The Biological foundation of marriage is to identify the father in advance.
The social function of marriage is to identify who is mated to who. Marriage isn't the only way to achieve this. It has been done with tattoos, rings ceremonies of various types. None of which are legally binding but all of which have the full social impact of a marriage.
Legally. That's where it get's interesting. Over the years the US government and it's many state and municipal authorities have built up various programs, and legal structures that amount to an incentive to have people in long term relationships get married and then even more structures to make exiting a marriage time consuming and awkward.
Marriage started out as a religious institution. The government actions mentioned above were mostly in response to this. Those structures have remained in the more secular society of today because research shows that on average children with 2 parents do better academically and socially. (See point 1 above)
So the question for me is WHY do homosexuals want to marry?
Seriously. It doesn't make sense to me. The same mindset that invented marriage also defined heterosexuality and celibacy as the only normal sexual expressions. Is it that gays want to marry just to get in on the free stuff (tm) ?
This reminds me of Seventh Day Adventists who demand to be employed in a supermarket. A bit of clarification SDA followers are not permitted to work on Saturday. Supermarkets are busiest on Saturday so it's the one day NOBODY gets off except in the most dire circumstances.
BTW: WoWC is just a game. If you don't like the rules play something else. I became a bowler instead of a wide reciver because I aplied the same logic.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
OK, everyone, I was making a point, but not at the poster, that was part of the joke I thought I was adding to...
/. no no...
Get it?
I thought it was quite funny to jump into the converstation from his joke, but apparently that is a now a
I don't play MMO's, so I can't answer this question...but maybe you can. Are your choices of character creation limited to just male and female?
I would think that multiple character races would also result in multiple "gender" selections.
It's spelt 'millennia', fuckoid.
"In California and many other states, there are laws against discrimination in public accomodations"
WoW isn't a "public" anything.
Your post porves once again that if you discuss a controversial subject on slashdot, some jackass (you) will share their opinion no matter how dumb it is.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
"Even though every significant scientific study on homosexual parents directly contradicts this view."
Go ahead and assume I'm a "bigot" (which is apparently how so many slashdotters do away with having reasoned arguments these days) but your facts are incorrect.
Think to yourself for a moment about what you said. That there is a CONSENSUS among researchers on this subject.
Apart from the fact that any consensus among researchers is nearly impossible, you failed to address the mounds of contradictory evidence.
"every significant study" does NOT suggest what you claim, but I imagine you get around that by discounting the studies you disagree with as "insignificant."
It always amazes me when people like you have the nerve to talk down to others because you think your ideology is superior, then resort to lying in order to make your case.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
You show me a homosexual marriage that produces phat epic lewt, and I'll show you a gay marriage the WoW community is ready to back!
On a more serious note, sex has no place in this game. A man can hug other men, he can commit his life to serving another man, but unless he plans on having sex with another man, there is absolutely no good reason to bring up that fact that he is gay. The same goes really for bringing up the fact that you are straight. Someone that ran around ironforge going "zomg I'm straight, I bang girlz!" would receive the same cold stfu from the WoW community as the GLBT group did. Announcing your sexual preference in a room potentially filled with children is disgusting.
You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
You had some mod points. You could retroactively mod everything I've said down because you DON'T LIKE IT.
Poor baby, doesn;t like what I say, so he resorts to censoring it.
What's it like to be a fascist (who's afraid to post non-AC)?
You're the definiton of coward.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
OK, everyone, I was making a point, but not at the poster, that was part of the joke I thought I was adding to...
How is accusing him of "innate bigotry" and saying it's only the 21st Century "for the rest of us" not directed the poster?
C'mon. Just admit it. You didn't get the joke, and were in too much of a hurry to be angry to realize what as ass you were making of yourself.
C'mon. Just admit it. You didn't get the joke, and were in too much of a hurry to be angry to realize what as ass you were making of yourself.
Sure that works, use that... Or you could go back and try to get the joke...
Freaking plebs...
[...] the different kinds of marriage referred to in the Book are legion [...]
Legion and creepy. Thanks for the follow-up. Also, "He's a cultural pioneer" -- I like this turn of phrase.
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
Wow, really. In what fact do you seat your bigotry?
There's a huge difference between divorce and death and explicitly deciding "we'll let that child be raised in a poor setting".
A poor setting. So, for you, which is "poorer" a single parent family or a dual parent family? And besides, we "let" children get raised by divorcees all the fucking time. (Isn't that part of the problem? For years the "think of the children" debate revolved around divorce, before there was the new bogeyman of gay parents or miscegenation).
I can already tell that I don't need to ask whether a mother-mother family is "poorer" than a mother-father family. Now, if you can bring yourself to admit that a dual-parent family can possibly be worse than a single-parent family, I'd have to wonder why you wouldn't demand other family improvement laws, like (again) mandatory divorce (single-parent better) or mandatory marriage (dual-parent better), mandatory birth control (to prevent unwed/single parent familes), etc. ad absurdum.
Again, which is better, "for the children": A single parent family, or a dual parent family. Don't equivocate, just answer the damn question.
(When you're done you can expound upon whether a white-black family is "poorer" than a white-white or black-black family. I can't wait for your reply!)
Finally:
It's not "bigotry" it's simple, rational thought. The concept that "any two people can be parents" is flat-out ridiculous and counter to natural human development. Every child should have a mother and a father. The number of people who disagree is, quite frankly, disturbing
Every naturally concieved child does have a mother and a father. We're talking about do those kids live with and are they raised by those same parents or some other combination of none or more of them. Whether we agree or not that "any two people can be parents" is moot because we don't have any other laws dictating what kind of families exist (well now that it's legal to have "mixed-race marriages" and "mixed-race children"). Unfit parents have children all the time. Some of them even know they are unfit and abandon their offspring to orphanages. To believe (and even insist it's "rational" as you put it) that two fit, loving adults can't raise children because of some arbitrary fear/custom seems to be the very definition of bigotry.
I will say again, the "Think of the Children" argument against homosexual marriages is completely bogus and is founded in nothing but the basest of prejudice.
Then again, you could just be trolling me! Congrats!
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
The original post said:
:)
I say, screw the middle-man.
The joke response was:
So... You're saying 3-way marriage should be okay too, then?
Get it, son? It's a comment about how "screw the middle man" can be read as "have sex with a third person in between the two of you," and since it's a thread about alternative marriages, it's funny to read it that way.
Your response:
Surprised your innate bigotry didn't lead you to the goat argument.
isn't actually funny at all. It also doesn't really "add" to the joke in any way. In fact, it's rather obvious that you didn't even get what it was.
Then you go on with:
However, considering the word Marriage comes basically comes from a term meaning, you have a significant other, or the union of TWO things, three wouldn't really be a marriage...
What in the name of High School Football are you ranting about now? The definition of marriage? WTF does that have to do with screwing the middle man?
Oh, should I mention the word marriage comes from French? That should make all the neo-cons hate it...
Now I'm completely baffled. Whatever you're trying to say here, it obviously has nothing to do with the joke. Also, don't "neo-cons" generally get off on Voltaire and Toqueville? Aren't they French guys?
And how did neo-cons enter the conversation anyway? The textbook definition of a neo-con is a social progressive who believes in a hawk-ish military posture for the sake of spreading freedom. In a nutshell: Mostly Liberal-thinking East-coast Jewish advocates of war against dictator states around the world. (They call them "neo" cons, you see, because they find themselves aligning with conservative movements, in spite of differences of philosophy, because the Republican Party generally seems to be the more bellicose of the two.)
Wow, I was just beginning to believe this was the 21st century. Oh wait, it is for the rest of us...
The post in question didn't actually say anything about any kind of marriage? He was making a sex joke.
But setting that aside, pretending it was a serious question: how is asking about 3-way marriage in any way non-progressive? Personally, those against it seem like the puritanical ones. Some societies have no problem at all with multiple-partner family units, and (while my religous sensibilities would prevent me from doing so) I think it's silly to tell other people that they can't do something like that.
In your temporal 'reality' do women still get to vote or is that forbidden also?
In what way did the post you replied to demonstrate a schism with reality. Posts from the same guy elsewhere seem to indicate that he's very okay with gay guilds, gay marriages, and openly gay characters in World of Warcraft. Why would the "3-way" comment, or any other comment, lead you to think he's against women voting???
Two girls at once and they like playing MMORPGs with him!?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Point taken. You're absolutely correct, and I bow to your command of the English language. Now get a life. ;-)
-Cybrex
Boundless Expansion, Self-Transformation, Dynamic Optimism, Intelligent Technology, Spontaneous Order- BEST DO IT SO!
heh. Way to pick on a misspelling to avoid developing a coherent and useful response. I stand in awe of your prowess in the realms of logic and reasoning. P.S. It's spelt "fucktoid."