Blizzard says sorry to WOW fan

By Games Industry.biz Published 13 February, 2006

Over gay-friendly guild row.

Blizzard has apologised to a World of Warcraft player who was given an official warning for attempting to set up an in-game guild which welcomed lesbian, gay and bisexual members.

WOW fan Sara Andrews was told by a Blizzard customer service representative that she was in breach of the game's terms of service by inviting players to join her "LGB friendly" guild.

Andrews contested the decision, but was told: "While some language in and of itself may not be offensive, it may incite certain responses in other players that will allow for discussion that we feel has no place in our game."

Now, however, Blizzard appears to have had a rethink. In an email to Andrews published by US website InNewsWeekly, Thor Biafore, Blizzard's worldwide head of customer service, said that the company sends "Aplogies for any inconvenience this has caused you or your guild."

"The action that was taken by our customer service representative was an unfortunate interpretation of our current policies, which are currently under review... I have had the warning removed from your account. Please accept our apologies for the way our staff characterised your conduct, and rest assured that your account will not be penalised in any way."

According to INW, Blizzard COO Paul Sams has confirmed that a new guild recruitment channel will be set up, "Providing players with a designated area where they can advertise their guilds in an appropriate fashion." Blizzard is also set to provide "sensitivity training" for 1000 WOW Game Masters in North America, Europe and Asia to ensure there is no repeat of the incident.

Andrews told In News Weekly that she was glad Blizzard had made the apology, but added that she is "curious to see what they mean by their current policy being 'under review.'"

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (78) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • trevd72 #1 6 years ago

    puffs play games too? surely not.

  • jonnyreb #2 6 years ago

    "puffs play games too? surely not."

    Looking for a job as a Blizzard PR rep?

  • freedumb #3 6 years ago

    I'm trying to think of a good little britain joke about the guild members being the only gays in the (WOW) Village, but I think I'll pass.

    /gets coat

  • Carlo #4 6 years ago

    It's poofs, not puffs.

    /shakes head, the insults are as inaccurate and mis-guided as the spelling!

    (/Waits for the inevitable spelling corrections to his own post)
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 10:56

  • Furbs #5 6 years ago

    I think the term "puffs" is also used in some areas. Its a coloqualism I believe.

  • Carlo #6 6 years ago

    It is? Then i appoligse for correcting you trev, but still poke my tongue out in your general direction. ;)

  • ekko #7 6 years ago

    So, does this mean that all other guilds are "LGB unfriendly"?

  • Lagto_Soa #8 6 years ago

    I hope she gets stung by a bee.

    Steady on.

  • Carlo #9 6 years ago

    jstar dies have a point

  • trevd72 #10 6 years ago

    up north its puffs, well thats we call our only gay in our small narrow minded ex-mining village.

  • jack_klugman #11 6 years ago

    Well this has made my day. Hurrah!

  • Artemis_Matsas #12 6 years ago

    Sexual - Political - Religious preferences have no place in online gaming. Period.

  • smoison #13 6 years ago

    "sensitivity training"

    I would hate to be a Blizzard employee for that.

    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 11:30

  • trevd72 #14 6 years ago

    online christians are the one that do my head in.

  • Zuiyo #15 6 years ago

    I would rather let people create guilds according to their own preferences.

  • jack_klugman #16 6 years ago

    Artemis_Matsas - Why?

  • trevd72 #17 6 years ago

    from what I see, some people in minorities love to marginalised in some ways. A friend of mine came out as gay in his mid 20's and the "only gay in the village" hat fits him perfectly.

    He wears his gayness like a badge and it is the focus of most his conversations and he gets in peoples faces with it and then gets upset when people "discriminate" against him for it. Your gay get over it - it is not a disability. Same applies here I believe they discriminate against themselves.

  • Scientist #18 6 years ago

    "Sexual preferences have no place in online gaming."

    That's kind of like saying gays have no place in the armed forces.

    This is an argument Lord Tebbit has regarding public displays of affection. It is fatuous to claim that online interaction should not mirror the norms of society. We haven't come this far with human rights just so some narrow-minded fools can make anonymous attacks in the online sphere.

  • Genji #19 6 years ago

    So they're... self-hating gays?

    I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here? They're pretending to be gay to get attention?

  • jack_klugman #20 6 years ago

    I have yet to come out as heterosexual. I wonder if anybody suspects.

  • pantherboy #21 6 years ago

    "Sexual - Political - Religious preferences have no place in online gaming. Period."

    Some pretty bland games were in for then

  • mazzl #22 6 years ago

    isn't it nice that in an online "role" playing game. you can be an lesbian elf or a tippical sexist pig of a troll ...

    i agree with people that discrimination can't really be a problem in a "fake" world.
    at least it should't be.

  • reality_cheque #23 6 years ago

    Andrews told In News Weekly that she was glad Blizzard had made the apology, but added that she is "curious to see what they mean by their current policy being 'under review.'"

    Their policy of not allowing guild recruitment in game I would guess, as this was against the TOS and is what she got the caution for and now (judging by the fact they've set up a channel for it) it isn't.

    The reason I expect other guild 'adverts' are allowed are purely because there are no/minimal complaints about it. If people who spam guild adverts are reported, I bet they would have had the same treatment - i.e. a temp ban.

  • JayScott #24 6 years ago

    @ jstar: Unless you want to get it on with the level 60 dragon, of course.

    But this is ridiculous. Don't we want our gaming experiences to be rounded and wholistic? Surely the more complex and varied the motivations/ethics/people we come across in our game worlds, the better? Of course sexuality has a place in online gaming. As does your approach to violence, any ethical choices you make, and your response to n00bs and smacktards.

    I'm glad Blizzard had the good sense to review their initial reaction. That, at least, is a positive step. And even if this person is the most annoying person in the world (I don't know her from a bar of soap) she still has the right to equal representation in her online and offline worlds, whatever her choices.

    Now about that level 60 dragon...Maybe if we sneak up from behind...
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 12:43

  • PearOfAnguish #25 6 years ago

    it may incite certain responses in other players that will allow for discussion that we feel has no place in our game."

    Yeah, because nobody has ever called someone a 'fag' in WoW before this happened...


    I know what Trevd is saying, I've known a few people like that. Some people like to continually point out how different they are because they're gay and when you tell them to shut up you're a homophobe.

  • kangarootoo #26 6 years ago

    @jstar

    You need to calm down mate. How can you get so angry about something that has no effect on your life?

    "Her sexuality has fuck all to do with my troll slaying"

    Since when was it about you? By the same merit your troll slaying has f'all to do with her sexuality, right?

    Live and let live I say, honestly with all that stress you are going to be dead before you are 70. Then who will slay your trolls for you?

  • trevd72 #27 6 years ago

    @Genji my point is that these days, generally, your sexual preference is not that much of a problem until you make a issue of it, then people generally ignore you or compain about you making you feel discriminated against.

  • peterfll #28 6 years ago

    This is a tough one. On one hand, gay people flock together like this - in real life or virtual - because there is protection in numbers. Everyone here who's ever played on-line will know how frequent the terms 'fag' and 'gay' are thrown around, and it can be pretty intimadating to some pepole and upsetting. So you flock together with other like-minded individuals who you feel you can relate to and can be protected from this type of comment.

    On the other hand it does create marginalism and sepratism.

    Of course in a perfect world there would be no homophobia and people wouldn't feel the need to seperate themselves - which is probably why, more than anything else, people create these groups.

    Personally my life isn't dictated by my sexuality but to some people it really defines them. I don't feel the need to seek out groups like this, but that's just me.

    But if there's one point I would like to make here and its one of the only things that still gets my goat going.... sexuality is NOT a preference. I could no more change my sexuality than I could change my race. I was born this way and believe me if I could have 'picked' what I was going to be at the age of 11 I would have picked to be straight, cos generally speaking its a lot less hassle.

    Of course, I'm a perfectly well-adjusted adult these days (!) who wouldn't chose to be any different now so please don't take this as a 'woe is me' comment.

  • reality_cheque #29 6 years ago

    Just because the term 'fag' is thrown around MMPORPGs all the time doesn't make it good or bad, it just means that people don't report the players.

    I make it a habit to report all offensive players, whether they're offensive to gays, jews, muslims, essex boys, whatever. Partly because of my twisted sense of humour, but also because if more people found themselves on the recieving end of a week long ban for calling someone a fag, then they'd either think twice about doing it again or wouldn't play online anymore. Either way, I win.

    Incidentally, I'm not gay, jewish or a muslim (although I am an essex boy), I'm just annoyed with childish name-calling. I also (before reporting them) publically explain to homophobic people that usually their homophobia is caused by a repressed fear that they might be gay themselves and so is part of an attempt to put a barrier between themselves and their 'inner gay'.

  • darkmistx #30 6 years ago

    The irony is of course that these gay guild members will open themselves up to a lot more abuse from other players, than if they just shut about thier sexual preference (or which hole they prefer to poke/be poked) and played the game.
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 13:20

  • Scientist #31 6 years ago

    " The irony is of course that these gay guild members will open themselves up to a lot more abuse from other players,"

    What a horribly prejudiced place WoW must be then.

  • Spiral #32 6 years ago

    I also (before reporting them) publically explain to homophobic people that usually their homophobia is caused by a repressed fear that they might be gay themselves and so is part of an attempt to put a barrier between themselves and their 'inner gay'.

    Do you do the same thing to racists?

  • O-Fox #33 6 years ago

    jstar - what do you mean 'they discriminate equally amongst all sexual preferences'. AS far as I am aware, there aren't that many. Homosexuality and Heterosexuality is it I think. At least, they're the only ones that are legal.

    As for her not having anything to do with your troll slaying, if WoW was just slaying monsters no-one would play it - it's the social aspect that keeps people playing. Take away or try to restrict that social aspect (no religion! no politics! no sexuality! just monster killing!) and you're in for a bit of a shit time.

  • Freek #34 6 years ago

    Is all fun depended to politics or religon??
    It's just baggage, unneeded baggage that you drag into a world that's free of it.

    Hell as general rule in life you should simply have; "No, discusions about politics, religon or art amongst friends", they always turn heated and are the quickest and easiest way to ruin a good time becuase of everybodys really strong and totaly fixed opinions regarding them.

    (I do consider the whole homo vs hetro thing to be politics, just incase there was confusion about that)
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 14:18

  • Scientist #35 6 years ago

    "It's just baggage, unneeded baggage that you drag into a world that's free of it."

    But the point is that people use terms such as fag to insult in WoW therefore the online is not free of this baggae. It is simply a microcosm of the real world.

    "Hell as general rule in life you should simply have; "No, discusions about politics, religon or art amongst friends","

    If you can't discuss this with friends with whom can you discuss it? A world without intelligent debate is a totalitarian regime.

  • Freek #36 6 years ago

    It's not a totalitarian regime at all. It's discussed between political adversaries, but you don't bring that stuff to the pub and least of all to games.

    The online wolrd of games was free of that baggage, but people drag into it anyway and conflict results, hence the rule.
    Edited by 2 at 13/02/06 @ 14:48

  • jumpdeveraux #37 6 years ago

    /leave guildrecruitmentchannel

  • abigsmurf #38 6 years ago

    looks like they're trying to pin a lot of the blame on the customer service rep who was only doing his job...

  • Scientist #39 6 years ago

    "but you don't bring that stuff to the pub"

    What do you talk about with your friends then? Football, celebrities and the weather?

    My friends and I are very intersted in politics, religion and art. Only through intelligent debate can we learn mroe about our own and others' beliefs. We are also mature enough to listen to each other's opinions, agree to disagree etc. It's harmless banter.

  • peterfll #40 6 years ago

    Well, I talk about the weather and celebrities with my friends. AND we debated the Mohammad cartoon situation at the weekend so like we cover ALL bases.

    No rock unturned.

  • jack_klugman #41 6 years ago

    What sort of rational person wants to play a game where freedom of speech is explicitly outlawed in the terms of service?

  • Freek #42 6 years ago

    Oh yes and then you enter in alcohol and somebody enivitably goes on a "we should just bomb all the mosques, those fucking poles are stealing our jobs, religon is for morons". Happend to many times, so now I just ignore it when somebody brings it up.

    Or add in online anonimity and goes even more extreme. Just go look at a random forum thread about it, reason goes out the window after a couple posts. People opinions are simply to rigid on the subject.

  • PearOfAnguish #43 6 years ago

    Homosexuality and Heterosexuality is it I think. At least, they're the only ones that are legal.

    There's asexual and bisexual. There are others, too.

  • rinoaMW #44 6 years ago

    I'm Lesbian Nightelf called Candy - Maybe i can join this guild and make friends with other like minded people...

    ..where do i (and others like me) sit in all this? will we be accepted in this LBG friendly guild?

    my point is that altho i really don't play wow as a gay nightelf called Candy, the game is, at the end of the day, an RPG and there will be ppl who do. Will ppl like this be able to join in with a guild that advertises as LBG and be accepted - or will the Gay Guild feel that this is another from of ridicule?

    Unfortunatly i am one of those people who agree's that this has no place in WoW (and even my above idea breaks my own Ideology) - the market is too wide spread, and its demographic age limit too broad, so anything Political, Racial, or about Sexuality really has no place here. Its a sad truth, but the human race isn't ready to deal with these issues.. so i for one would rather not have the conflict.

    hell... a couple of us had a few warnings for arguing about what would be better, the XBOX 360 or the PS3 in /general... so i can imagine the problem with anything more risky...

    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 15:31

  • Scientist #45 6 years ago

    "Its a sad truth, but the human race isn't ready to deal with these issues.. so i for one would rather not have the conflict. "

    It's not even the human race in general. It's videogamers in supposedly enlightened societies who whinge about being called geeks by non-gamers.

    If we brush the issue under the carpet we will never progress, hence it should be raised and dealt with.

  • rinoaMW #46 6 years ago

    "Its a sad truth, but the human race isn't ready to deal with these issues.. so i for one would rather not have the conflict. "

    It's not even the human race in general. It's videogamers in supposedly enlightened societies who whinge about being called geeks by non-gamers.

    If we brush the issue under the carpet we will never progress, hence it should be raised and dealt with. "


    -------------------------------------------

    possibly... But like i also said "the market is too wide spread, and its demographic age limit too broad" - there are certain religons that frown upon this type of sexuality, and also people that are so closed minded as to not be accepting of such things.

    There are also children under the age of 10 playing... Now Blizzard have added Parental Controls for parents to limit their child's playtimes - but there isn't one to filterout the Religous, Political or Sexuality comments/arguements.

    The best thing for Blizz to do in this situation is stamp out ALL aspects of this. Its not really a case of trying not to offend minorities, but more a case of pleasing the majority.

    And I'd argue that since the advent of the PS1 - the geek stigma of the videogame world, doesn't really exist anymore...
    Edited by 2 at 13/02/06 @ 15:51

  • PearOfAnguish #47 6 years ago

    At what point does your sexuality become a concern in an online game anyway?
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/06 @ 15:53

  • peterfll #48 6 years ago

    Why should a child not be aware of an LGBT guild? What do you think these guilds are up when play WoW? Do you think a child would be exposed to something unsavoury? What about the plenty of unsavoury elements populating the online community generally?

    If a child is using a PC to access WoW and internet generally, with or without parental controls, personally I think there's a lot more to be worried about than them stumbling across a LBGT guild in WoW.

    Still, it makes great Daily Mail headlines I guess "my child groomed by LBGT guild - taught to fight like a fairy".

  • reality_cheque #49 6 years ago

    @Spiral: Yes, I report anyone I deem offensive.

  • rinoaMW #50 6 years ago

    @peterfill

    you only picked up on a small part of my point, and your headline, albeit flippant, would be the kinda thing that the Tabloids would spout... :)

  • Khab #51 6 years ago

    Sorry, but the argument that sexual preference has no place in WoW was nulled and voided when Blizzard decided to have an emote for flirting, or (it could be argued) allowed chat in-game. THEY brought sexual preference in there, but ONLY the current norm (heterosexuality). This is discriminatory against those individuals who do not fit the norm, and thus Blizzard must allow them to express their sexuality as well, or face charges.

    Just turn it around - if the only accepted form of attraction in-game was homosexuality, surely you see that some people are not being treated equally?

  • reality_cheque #52 6 years ago

    Khab: Just because they added the flirt emote, and the chat function, I don't see how that promotes only hetrosexuality. Can you only flirt from a male avatar to a female avatar and vice versa?

  • Harlequeen #53 6 years ago

    I am gay, and play WOW. I would not want to join a gay guild as it would seem a little dull and restrictive. The "That's so gay" from kids does get tiresome though. I do not have a problem with people forming their own guild with whatever politcal inclinations they wish. Just so long as they do not demean or insult others who do not share their opinion.

  • shamblemonkee #54 6 years ago

    tongue firmly in cheek.....

    Will they claim some taverns as LGBT only?

    Seriously it's only an issue when people choose to make it an issue.

  • Pike #55 6 years ago

    @Khab: I disagree that Blizzard should be forced to adapt to players who don't adapt to the heteronormative paradigm. Now I believe that the action they took against the edvertisment of a GLBT-guild was stupid and wrong. I am also glad that Blizzard came to it's senses on the subject and seems to be backtracking on their previous stance.

    However Blizzard are a private company and they should be allowed to set wathever rules they want and those who don't like those rules are free to take their business elsewhere. An MMORPG is not a public service that should be subject to rules about equal treatment. Consumer complaints and boycotts are really the only measures that should be used in a case such as this.

  • Jokerr #56 6 years ago

    I find it interesting regarding the concept of 'homosexuality', why do people feel the need to put themselves exclusively in one group or the other?

    If you go back to ancient Greek times, homosexuality was acceptable in society, which is why some people call it 'Greek Love'. The Romans also thought it was acceptable, as long as you were always the 'giver' and not the 'taker', otherwise you'd end up being ridiculed and laughed at for the rest of your days. It was seen as a sign of weakness to submit yourself in such a way, and it was crime to punishable by death to sodomise a fellow roman citizen, but okay to do it with a common slave.

    My point is though that the Romans or Greeks would never have limited themselves exculsively to relationships with one sex, the concept didn't even exist. Hell, even Shakespeare had a male lover as well, and nobody implies that Shakespeare was gay do they?

    It's only in very recent times, that the definitions of being exclusively homosexual or heterosexual have arisen.

    Edited by 2 at 13/02/06 @ 17:16

  • darkmistx #57 6 years ago

    hah

  • PearOfAnguish #58 6 years ago

    ^ Now that is a deep and insightful comment.

  • admir #59 6 years ago

    cant wait to make fun of them

  • Carrybagma #60 6 years ago

    Horace was the first videogame homosexual.
    In fact, he was 'the only gay on the Spectrum' for some time.
    Edited by 1 at 14/02/06 @ 00:39

  • deadlock #61 6 years ago

    I don't have a problem with people using the word 'gay' in online gaming to describe something that is a bit crap. 'Gay' wasn't always synonymous with 'homosexual' and the meaning that it has assumed in online gaming is actually the polar opposite of the word's original meaning. Its use in this context could therefore be described as ironic, rather than homophobic.

    With regard to the LBGT Guild - whatever. Let them eat cake. Or the other c word, whatever their preference is. Personally, I'm not interested and I think you'll find that (a) most people aren't and (b) if you didn't feel the need to advertise your homosexuality then less tolerant people wouldn't feel the need to complain about it.

  • kangarootoo #62 6 years ago

    "Its a sad truth, but the human race isn't ready to deal with these issues.. so i for one would rather not have the conflict"

    I'm sure there are 50 proverbs out there about the man who stands by and does nothing being as bad as the one who presses the button (obviously, real proverbs won't be a shit as the one I create on the fly). If you simply "avoid the conflict", those who choose to inflict their bigoted views on other will win. Where would India be if Ghandi had simply avoided the conflict in the pursuit of a peaceful life? Not quite the same I realise, but my point about apathy stands I think.


    @reality_cheque
    "Just because they added the flirt emote, and the chat function, I don't see how that promotes only hetrosexuality. Can you only flirt from a male avatar to a female avatar and vice versa?"

    I think that is Khab's point. They provided a function that in itself knows no discrimination, but then they actively chose to restrict the use of that function in a discriminatory way.

    Someone way back mentioned that the Blizzard rep was "just doing his job". I don't think anyone is suggesting that the rep should be sacked, kicked in the nuts, pointed and laughed at, or whatever. He was following Blizzard policy so they are responsible.

  • kangarootoo #63 6 years ago

    "'Gay' wasn't always synonymous with 'homosexual' and the meaning that it has assumed in online gaming is actually the polar opposite of the word's original meaning. Its use in this context could therefore be described as ironic, rather than homophobic."

    I really don't think the average 12 yr old internet kid has grasped the irony when he calls someone gay. Are you actually suggesting that the use of the word gay as an insult doesn't have its roots in homophobia? I'm not sure I would agree there.

    "if you didn't feel the need to advertise your homosexuality then less tolerant people wouldn't feel the need to complain about it."

    Thats no excuse at all. Having a racist live in your street doesn't place some bizarre responsibility on their black neighbour to avoid advertising their "blackness". Another analogy might be that someone going to a football match shouldn't wear a scarf, because they might attract the attentions of a lunatic thug (it might be prudent not to wear colours to certain matches, but that doesn't make it right).

    The responsibility to not be a bigot always lies with the bigot.

  • I_Have_The_Power #64 6 years ago

    lol, deadlock :)

    Its true, "Gay" used to mean "Happy", and I take offence that only homosexuals think it implies exclusively to them. Can't Heterosexual people be "Gay" any more? And why does being a Homosexual denote being "happy"?

    Stupid word really...
    Edited by 1 at 14/02/06 @ 09:40

  • reality_cheque #65 6 years ago

    @kangarootoo: "I think that is Khab's point. They provided a function that in itself knows no discrimination, but then they actively chose to restrict the use of that function in a discriminatory way."

    So are you saying you CAN'T flirt between same sex characters? Preventing people from advertising their guild is very different to restricting the expression of a characters sexuality via a limitation of an emote. The first is enforcing TOS (no advertising of guilds in game) and the second is, err, whatever the word for repressing freedom of sexuality is.

    This whole thing strikes me as very much a case of a Blizzard employee using an unfortunate choice of words and homosexual rights organisations exploiting it for free press. All sides are as wrong as each other (Blizzard rep for not thinking before typing, the player for violating the TOS, and that bloody gay right group for hopping on the bandwagon).

    If the Blizzard rep had simply said "You're being banned for violating the TOS by advertising your guild" then we'd not be having this discussion. I've a suspicious feeling we'd find that anyone reported for advertising their guild would be treated the same if people bothered to report them.

    Slightly OTT, the idea of no guild spam in game was something that appealed to me about WoW. Now they're adding a channel for it I feel it's probably going to spill over into the other channels (judging by how many people tell me in Guild Wars that it's ok to spam the public channels with their trade stuff "because everyone else is doing it" or my favourite "This location is a trade city so I can post my messages into any channel I want you n00b";)

  • kangarootoo #66 6 years ago

    "So are you saying you CAN'T flirt between same sex characters"

    Nooooo, I'm not saying that. I'm saying Blizzard's actions are associated with making that restriction. Now I realise they didn't make that exact restriction in tech or policy so I am in danger of putting words in their mouth here.

    Ahh, reading back I misunderstood your question. Were you asking if there was an actual technical restriction of the flirt function? If so, I can't answer as I don't play WoW. But I thought you were talking in general terms so I'm just confusing the matter.

  • reality_cheque #67 6 years ago

    Most gay guys I've met are nice, but then I've only met 5 so perhaps we're more of a statistical blip. Never met a lesbian, but I have met 1384849 girls who claim to be bi because they kissed a girl once when they were 14.

  • reality_cheque #68 6 years ago

    @Kangarootoo: Yeah, it was the technical side of it I was curious about. There doesn't seem to be anything preventing people being gay/ straight/ bisexual/ asexual/ transexual/ metrosexual/ hometrosexual/ whateverlabelpeoplefeellikeassigningtothemselves (the suffix -sexual is now beginning to lose all meaning in my head as a result of this post) other than a case of "don't discuss it in public channels in case there are kids about" which is just blizzard covering their own arses with regards to lawsuits from parents of kids that have discovered a meaning to the term 'shrimping' that does not involve a boat.

  • rinoaMW #69 6 years ago

    yes Kangarootoo - you can flirt with same sex charas, but unless you edit the emote yourself its not as offendable as it sounds...

    /kiss = "you blow a kiss at Kangarootoo" (predefined)

    /em RinoaMW grabs Kangarootoo and kisses him passionately... = "RinoaMW grabs Kangarootoo and kisses him passionately..." (edited)

    with editable emotes however, it kinda opens up the world to all sorts of problems... i think blizz originally intended this function to be used by roleplayers, but it can be abused by anyone...

    /em RinoaMW hates all gays = "RinoaMW hates all gays"

    (please note: i don't really, i'm just proving a point :)
    Edited by 2 at 14/02/06 @ 11:00

  • peterfll #70 6 years ago

    @rinoaMW I wasn't targetting your individual comments, I just went on a general rant. Although I was quite pleased with my pseudo tabloid headline and have applied to join the Daily Mail as a journarlist accordingly ;-0

    @ Pike - I agree, a private company such as this has the right to do whatever they see fit really, and as consumers people should vote with their feet. After all, as consumers that's all you can do in these situations.

    @ General debate on the word 'gay'

    You know, when other kids in my class starting call me a poof and gay at the age of seven I really didn't have much of a choice, you know? The term was imposed on me, and its something I have come to accept in general lexicon. I find it quite insulting that other people here are accusing me and perhaps others in todays gay community of claiming ownership of the word. I'd love to use another word. And as someone has already pointed out, a 12 year old will not grasp the full concept of homophobia when he uses the term 'gay' in a derogative way, which is the manner that its being used in - in this context. So yes, if some complete stranger decides to call me 'gay' during an online encounter I'm more than likely to assume its origins are homophobic in nature. You can hardly blame me for that given my life experiences. Of course, plenty of my straight mates (of which make up the majority of my circle of friends, not that I have to justify who has what sexuality) can call me a poof, queer, gay-boy, homo or whatever they want as I know they aren't homophobic and it's all about THE CONTEXT. Some 12 year old from the US does not fit into that context, and I'm afraid it does remind me of that period of my life from the age of 7 to 16 where I was relatively consistantly verbally and physically abused for being *gay*.

    ps I've gone on a rant! I'm not trying to be a slave to any cause, just want to increase understanding of the issue, y'know?

  • rinoaMW #71 6 years ago

    I see your point Peterfill, but I think the problem here is that some people wear the word "gay" as a badge, and as soon as someone else uses it even in a harmless way, then those badge wearer’s take offence... even if its used by a child who doesn't understand the context in which they use it.

    You can't blame children of the ages 7-16 to fully understand their name-calling. You can blame their upbringing, however, for not being more accommodating - be it about religion, politics or sexuality... Most kids will throw the word around in the playground without fully understanding what it actually means...and as they get older and their repertoire of words expands - it soon turns from "You're Gay!" to "You're an absolute F**k head!" - and I think that’s where the context of most of the abuse lies.. Not in the fact that they are setting out to be homophobic... and even when they use other terms they don't actually mean what they say... its more an exclamation of surprise, horror, annoyance etc...

    You have to admit tho - those kids in your story were right :)

    Do you know – I’ve been playing Wow for over a year now, and I’ve never heard anyone use the word "gay" - or even the mention of anything remotely connected to the gay community... be it guilds or otherwise

    tbh, I’m getting a little sick of this argument (even tho I keep adding to it - shame on me! :) .. its going around in circles - so I’m not gonna post in this thread again. But Its like I said earlier; "Its a sad truth, but the human race isn't ready to deal with these issues" and I stand by what I said... Wars are still fought over such things, and its only over a lot of time and teaching can we educate society... we haven’t even reached tolerance - so its gonna take along time before humanity reaches understanding.

    see you next thread! byeee :)

  • jab98 #72 6 years ago

    "sensitivity training"

    Anyone seen the South Park episode: "The Death Camp of Tolerance"?

  • peterfll #73 6 years ago

    @rinoaMW

    I know you're not posting anymore, but I hope you're still reading :-)

    I take your point about people wearing the gay badge, and agree with it. Many people in *minorities* chose to wear badges and play victims. It's been done by racial minorities, religious groups and of course gay people. They end up damaging their respective causes. Naughty people.

    If there's one point that saddens me is that through homophobia the term *gay* is continued to be used in a derogatory manner (and I don't blame the kids persee - you're right, its the parents) and that my 5 year old nephew will come across the term (or 'poof') sooner or later in his own playground. And in all the progress that's been made in the last 25 years he's probably just as likely to come across it. And it'll still damage those kids who like myself, yes, turned out to be great, grizzly old pooftas, in the way that it marred part of my otherwise-perfectly-happy childhood. And ruined most of my school life. Sorry - where's my badge?! ;-)

    Oh, and I'd argue with on the point that a 16 year old doesn't know what homophobia is. If they're old enough to f**k they're old enough to know what homophbia is.

    ps Fancy a shag? Don't worry - you can let me know on the next thread.

  • kangarootoo #74 6 years ago

    "lawsuits from parents of kids that have discovered a meaning to the term 'shrimping' that does not involve a boat."

    LOL, nice one.

  • reality_cheque #75 6 years ago

    @kangarootoo: And there was me thinking that'd gone right over people's heads :) Glad I'm not the only one here who is 'a bit wrong'!

  • kangarootoo #76 6 years ago

    Actually, I don't even know what your kind of shrimping is. But the fact that I saw the joke was enough to make me laugh :)

  • reality_cheque #77 6 years ago

    I'd like to officially state that it is not my kind of shrimping! I must be the only Profanisaurus reader here :(

    I'm not going to explain 'shrimping' because I have no wish to be banned, if indeed one can get banned from this place.

  • deadlock #78 6 years ago

    I was being largely facetious - I know that the average idiot that bandies the word 'gay' around isn't doing it in an ironic way. I don't think they're necessarily doing it in a homophobic way either - I think "thoughtless" or "ignorant" would be a more appropriate way to describe it. Whether or not you could also describe it as "harmless" is debatable.

    Also, part of my original point was that for some online gamers (and 'real world' types), the word 'gay' has transcended the late-20th century meaning and become the polar opposite of what it originally meant. In the same way that 'gay' was co-opted to mean 'homosexual', it has now been re-co-opted to mean 'a bit crap'. Regardless of whether or not those who use it are aware of this fact, it still stands.

    As for the rest - yeah, I suppose it's difficult when you are hetero, and therefore not on the receiving end of bigotry and prejudice, to understand why gay people feel the need to wear their sexuality like a badge.