Controversial Limerick Discussion

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

It's a very specific gendered sort of harrassment that kind of proves her point (ie. transphobia generally being a thing), which is where the difference from, say, Jack Thompson lies.

 

 

Okay so how about this.

 

I'm Jewish, the stereotypes that modern Jewish jokes are based on essentially formed arguments that led to the murder of 6 million Jews.  IE Jews are greedy, Jews have lots of money, Jews are deceptive etc. etc.

 

Yet I would not want them to be censored because I know that a joke is not the same as actual hate speech.

 

 

If actual hate speech against jews was common and encouraged by society (ie. if you actually lived in Nazi Germany), how would you feel about people making jokes about the jews?

[ChipMHazard]

 

 

So what if some do find it offensive? Do you speak for all those [transgender] that don't? This is just another silly fallacy. 

Alot of people find alot of different things offensive. That doesn't mean that forms of media has to conform to their wishes. 

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

Also, you should be legally forbidden from ever using the word "fallacy" until you learn what they are and why is it useful to have a working knowledge of them 

 

 

My poiny being that your argument didn't have on. What I replied to had no bearing on the discussion what so ever and was simply an appeal to emotion.

 

I fully understand the wording and so far what I've seen the most is simple bandwagoning. As to trading insults, well you can surely keep doing it if you so wish. Just don't drag me into it. 

[Creslin321]

 

 

 

It's a very specific gendered sort of harrassment that kind of proves her point (ie. transphobia generally being a thing), which is where the difference from, say, Jack Thompson lies.

 

 

Okay so how about this.

 

I'm Jewish, the stereotypes that modern Jewish jokes are based on essentially formed arguments that led to the murder of 6 million Jews.  IE Jews are greedy, Jews have lots of money, Jews are deceptive etc. etc.

 

Yet I would not want them to be censored because I know that a joke is not the same as actual hate speech.

 

 

If actual hate speech against jews was common and encouraged by society (ie. if you actually lived in Nazi Germany), how would you feel about people making jokes about the jews?

 

 

I think that's an extreme example because it's hard to imagine a Jewish joke in Nazi Germany NOT being hate speech.  But let's be honest, modern day America is nowhere close to Nazi Germany when it comes to Trans people.  Yes, there are still hateful bigots out there, but there aren't exactly death camps.  The very fact that we're discussing this joke the way we are basically proves that.

 

Anyway, I really think you have to look at the overall intent and context of the joke.  IMO, the joke we're talking about here isn't even explicitly about trans people.  It contains no derogatory terms, and you have to make a lot of assumptions to even find it offensive.  I don't really think it qualifies as hate speech.

[Rance]

The joke is about trans people? When I read it I thought it was about some guy mistaking an elf guy for a woman. I guess I'm elfphobic...

[Creslin321]

The joke is about trans people? When I read it I thought it was about some guy mistaking an elf guy for a woman. I guess I'm elfphobic...

 

LOL, I honestly thought it was more of a drunk joke.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

So what if some do find it offensive? Do you speak for all those [transgender] that don't? This is just another silly fallacy. 

Alot of people find alot of different things offensive. That doesn't mean that forms of media has to conform to their wishes. 

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

Also, you should be legally forbidden from ever using the word "fallacy" until you learn what they are and why is it useful to have a working knowledge of them 

 

 

My poiny being that your argument didn't have on. What I replied to had no bearing on the discussion what so ever and was simply an appeal to emotion.

 

I fully understand the wording and so far what I've seen the most is simple bandwagoning. As to trading insults, well you can surely keep doing it if you so wish. Just don't drag me into it. 

 

 

No, I mean, what was your point with the statement "a lot of people find a lot of content offensive; media doesn't have to conform to them"? Case seems pretty clear-cut: somebody politely pointed out that the limerick is kinda problematic, Obsidian almost immediately responded by contacting the backer who submitted it and asking him whether he's cool with its removal, he said yes, so it's probably going to be removed. At least this is what I've heard. So what exactly is the point of pointing out that media doesn't have to conform to people who find content offensive? Is conforming to the wishes of opressed groups inherently bad and they should stop doing it?

 

Also, I don't think it's insulting to point out that a working knowledge of fallacies is generally best used to check one's own logical processes, not to use it as a bludgeon in internet arguments.

[Ohioastro]

First off, if you're hitting refresh and monopolizing a discussion with dozens and dozens of posts, you're usually doing no one a favor.  There is a lot of that going on here.

 

Context matters.  It's certainly true that you could imagine offensive content that should be omitted.  But there really are people who are looking for fights - looking to see if there are ways that they can twist and distort words to put them in a negative light, so that they can start a bandwagon.  This is frequently explicit, if you look through twitter threads.  So, no, you are not obligated to take their word for it - you're allowed to read things yourself.

 

This particular limerick is a tempest in a teapot.  The guy who runs off and kills himself is the butt of the joke, not the person who he slept with; you can try and use Nazi analogies all you want, but they rarely shed light.  It's not required reading to progress in the game at all - you have to dig through multiple layers of buttons to even reach these.  And *all* are from backers.

 

So, no, you don't give people looking for excuses to get angry veto power over what you include and what you don't.  You do use reasonable standards to judge what is acceptable and what is not.  And the fact that there are hundreds, and there is precisely one (marginal) complaint, suggests that any problem is pretty much on the margins.

[Rance]

 

 

 

 

So what if some do find it offensive? Do you speak for all those [transgender] that don't? This is just another silly fallacy. 

Alot of people find alot of different things offensive. That doesn't mean that forms of media has to conform to their wishes. 

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

Also, you should be legally forbidden from ever using the word "fallacy" until you learn what they are and why is it useful to have a working knowledge of them 

 

 

My poiny being that your argument didn't have on. What I replied to had no bearing on the discussion what so ever and was simply an appeal to emotion.

 

I fully understand the wording and so far what I've seen the most is simple bandwagoning. As to trading insults, well you can surely keep doing it if you so wish. Just don't drag me into it. 

 

 

No, I mean, what was your point with the statement "a lot of people find a lot of content offensive; media doesn't have to conform to them"? Case seems pretty clear-cut: somebody politely pointed out that the limerick is kinda problematic, Obsidian almost immediately responded by contacting the backer who submitted it and asking him whether he's cool with its removal, he said yes, so it's probably going to be removed. At least this is what I've heard. So what exactly is the point of pointing out that media doesn't have to conform to people who find content offensive? Is conforming to the wishes of opressed groups inherently bad and they should stop doing it?

 

Also, I don't think it's insulting to point out that a working knowledge of fallacies is generally best used to check one's own logical processes, not to use it as a bludgeon in internet arguments.

 

"Obsidian almost immediately responded by contacting the backer who submitted it and asking him whether he's cool with its removal, he said yes, so it's probably going to be removed."

 

source on this?

[zered]

People get so easily offended nowadays.

[Lord Wafflebum]

The joke is about trans people? When I read it I thought it was about some guy mistaking an elf guy for a woman. I guess I'm elfphobic...

YOU MONSTER!!! I love elves so much. If only they loved me back...

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

 

 

It's a very specific gendered sort of harrassment that kind of proves her point (ie. transphobia generally being a thing), which is where the difference from, say, Jack Thompson lies.

 

 

Okay so how about this.

 

I'm Jewish, the stereotypes that modern Jewish jokes are based on essentially formed arguments that led to the murder of 6 million Jews.  IE Jews are greedy, Jews have lots of money, Jews are deceptive etc. etc.

 

Yet I would not want them to be censored because I know that a joke is not the same as actual hate speech.

 

 

If actual hate speech against jews was common and encouraged by society (ie. if you actually lived in Nazi Germany), how would you feel about people making jokes about the jews?

 

 

I think that's an extreme example because it's hard to imagine a Jewish joke in Nazi Germany NOT being hate speech.  But let's be honest, modern day America is nowhere close to Nazi Germany when it comes to Trans people.  Yes, there are still hateful bigots out there, but there aren't exactly death camps. 

 

 

Is discrimination only bad when it gets to the point of people getting put in death camps?

 

Because let me tell you, trans people have it really, really bad even though they're not being gassed to death.

[Marceror]

Would it be off topic to talk about controversial limericks that have nothing to do with PoE? Or how about cats? Would it be off topic to discuss cats? Personally, I'm not a big fan.

 

At any rate... about those backer NPCs. They're sort of interesting (this is the real topic of this thread, by the way, in spite of the title that was added by mod later).

[aluminiumtrioxid]

"Obsidian almost immediately responded by contacting the backer who submitted it and asking him whether he's cool with its removal, he said yes, so it's probably going to be removed."

 

 

source on this?

 

 

Hm, you seem to be right, there doesn't seem to be any more reliable source than "internet people said this is the case". Sawyer seemed to be sympathetic to the issue, but the final verdict is "We are going to be talking with our backers about this issue in our next backer update. They are the ones that made Eternity possible, so we feel it is our duty to discuss it with them first."

 

Which is... reasonable, although I still think it's an issue strictly between the backer who submitted the epitaph and the devs.

[ChipMHazard]

 

 

 

 

So what if some do find it offensive? Do you speak for all those [transgender] that don't? This is just another silly fallacy. 

Alot of people find alot of different things offensive. That doesn't mean that forms of media has to conform to their wishes. 

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

Also, you should be legally forbidden from ever using the word "fallacy" until you learn what they are and why is it useful to have a working knowledge of them 

 

 

My poiny being that your argument didn't have on. What I replied to had no bearing on the discussion what so ever and was simply an appeal to emotion.

 

I fully understand the wording and so far what I've seen the most is simple bandwagoning. As to trading insults, well you can surely keep doing it if you so wish. Just don't drag me into it. 

 

 

No, I mean, what was your point with the statement "a lot of people find a lot of content offensive; media doesn't have to conform to them"? Case seems pretty clear-cut: somebody politely pointed out that the limerick is kinda problematic, Obsidian almost immediately responded by contacting the backer who submitted it and asking him whether he's cool with its removal, he said yes, so it's probably going to be removed. At least this is what I've heard. So what exactly is the point of pointing out that media doesn't have to conform to people who find content offensive? Is conforming to the wishes of opressed groups inherently bad and they should stop doing it?

 

Also, I don't think it's insulting to point out that a working knowledge of fallacies is generally best used to check one's own logical processes, not to use it as a bludgeon in internet arguments.

 

 

It's not problematic simply because someone pointed out that he/she found it offensive, insensitive,of poor taste etc. What you've heard doesn't constitute as evidence for your conclusion. Even if Obsidian were to remove the joke it wouldn't weaken the point I raised as I would still disagree with it. 

And here you are again with your fallacy. Trying to guilt me into accepting your premise. There is no group being discriminated against in this case nor is there any group being mocked in this case. There is supposedly one person whom supposedly shared his/her concern about a vague, lyrical joke which then got spread around via social media and turned into a mountain of an issue. 

No, I don't believe in censorship simply because people found something offensive. You are allowed to make jokes about pretty much everything you can imagine, just like people are allowed to dislike said jokes. Works of fiction are also allowed to depict contet that is disturbing, offensive etc. Only times where I would deem it nessecary would be when it, at the very least borders, on actual hate speech. Why do I think it's important to only censor in the most extreme cases? Because it's a very slippery slope. 

 

It should most definently be used when others lean on them like crutches and base the entirely of their premises on them. You may belive that they mainly serve as a means to scrutinize oneself. I however do not. All you, and others for that matter, would have needed to do was present actual proof to back up your conclusion. Instead all that I have personally seen so far is bandwagoning. Basicly this turned into a "Won't someone think of the children!" argument.

 

Now If Obsidian decides to go over all of their backer memorials and rewrite/remove those that they don't like (With the approval of the backers) then that would be fine, or at least not as bad. It would be far more consistent than just picking out one example and removing that in an attempt to appease the mob. 

Edited April 1, 2015 by ChipMHazard

[aluminiumtrioxid]

There is no group being discriminated against in this case nor is there any group being mocked in this case. There is supposedly one person whom supposedly shared his/her concern about a vague, lyrical joke which then got spread around via social media and turned into a mountain of an issue. 

 

 

Was it, though?

 

Because from what I've seen, people were politely pointing out their concerns, Obsidian said they were looking into it, aaand... that's pretty much it. I literally can't find anything more harsh than "this joke is vaguely tasteless, you might want to look into it". But for some reason, this prompted others to start wailing on and on about censorship and evil SJWs making mountains of molehills. Also, harrassment.

 

Bandwagoning indeed.

[Fade_]

Very relevant.  Should be read by everyone.

 

http://time.com/3766915/trevor-noah-tweets-outrage/

[Mashiki]

Seriously that's super funny and people who get offended by it are lame killjoys who have no sense of humour.

 

The crying game is now a 'transphobic' movie in their books.  I personally enjoyed the hell out of it.

[Longknife]

Show me a trans person offended by this limerick and I can show you a trans person who doesn't give a **** (or even one who is mad that this outrage is giving trans people a bad name).

 

 

This is not about trans people. If it were, then that would imply trans people are a hive mind who all think and feel the same, which is absurd. This is the same as any type of humor: some people laugh, some people get their knickers in a twist. It's been pointed out before that it's debateable that the limerick is even at the expense of the trans community. Would the joke have been different were the guy so drunk he slept with a gay guy for example without really fully realizing it or caring as much as he normally would due to alcohol?

 

I see no reason to waste this much time and effort into this topic. Someone got butthurt after they read it, people get butthurt every day, sad day for them. If you want to talk potential controversy within the game and it's content? I think the plot twist (not really a twist) provided by the main quest and the main game itself is MUCH more likely to legitimately offend people, but that does not mean it shouldn't be allowed to exist. Same thing here.

[Rance]

 

There is no group being discriminated against in this case nor is there any group being mocked in this case. There is supposedly one person whom supposedly shared his/her concern about a vague, lyrical joke which then got spread around via social media and turned into a mountain of an issue. 

 

 

Was it, though?

 

Because from what I've seen, people were politely pointing out their concerns, Obsidian said they were looking into it, aaand... that's pretty much it. I literally can't find anything more harsh than "this joke is vaguely tasteless, you might want to look into it". But for some reason, this prompted others to start wailing on and on about censorship and evil SJWs making mountains of molehills. Also, harrassment.

 

Bandwagoning indeed.

 

I don't know where you have been looking but a few days ago when this whole "controversy" was fresh I saw some pretty vile harrassment and accusations being thrown around from both camps. But it seems like this entire "outrage" have mostly died down now. 

 

I would prefer if someone created a mod that removed the backer content instead of Obsidian doing anything about it(they are probably busy with the bugfixing right now) that way people like the OP or people having a problem with the joke can download that mod and be happy.

[ChipMHazard]

 

There is no group being discriminated against in this case nor is there any group being mocked in this case. There is supposedly one person whom supposedly shared his/her concern about a vague, lyrical joke which then got spread around via social media and turned into a mountain of an issue. 

 

 

Was it, though?

 

Because from what I've seen, people were politely pointing out their concerns, Obsidian said they were looking into it, aaand... that's pretty much it. I literally can't find anything more harsh than "this joke is vaguely tasteless, you might want to look into it". But for some reason, this prompted others to start wailing on and on about censorship and evil SJWs making mountains of molehills. Also, harrassment.

 

Bandwagoning indeed.

 

 

Very much so. At least from what I can tell. 

 

People insinuating that Obsidian should change it is bad enough by itself, not to mention those that are blaming Obsidian for being transphobic. Not everyone have been polite about their critiscm (This thread being a clear if limited example) and politeness has nothing to do with bandwagoning. Do not even try to make one "side" of this discussion innocent. Do not even try making this into something akin to the gamergate "war" where both sides profess innocence. 

 

I must once again state that the [alleged] harrasement of the person whom [allegedly] originally raised the point about the joke has no bearing on this discussion. None. Zip. Nada. It's a matter for the police and the social media sites where it took place.

There is transphobia in the world, but this game is not an example of it. There is nothing to find offensive with the memorials except perhaps the poor writing that went into some of them. 

Edited April 1, 2015 by ChipMHazard

[aluminiumtrioxid]

...those that are blaming Obsidian for being transphobic. Not everyone have been polite about their critiscm...

 

 

...And I suppose you expect me to take your word on this over my personal experience with the critics' group because you have been such a paragon of rational thinking, right?

 

 

Do not even try to make one "side" of this innocent. Do not even try making this into something akin to the gamergate "war" where both sides profess innocence. 

 

...Well this part was... something. About something, I'm sure. There were words. On my screen. That's pretty much all I can tell.

 

Mind injecting a bit of coherence here?

[Mashiki]

 

Very much so. At least from what I can tell. 

 

People insinuating that Obsidian should change it is bad enough by itself, not to mention those that are blaming Obsidian for being transphobic. Not everyone have been polite about their critiscm and politeness (This thread being a clear if limited example) has nothing to do with bandwagoning. Do not even try to make one "side" of this innocent. Do not even try making this into something akin to the gamergate "war" where both sides profess innocence. 

 

 

Pretty easy to figure out which side of the issue you can be on with this, and which side is innocent.  One side wants the original to remain because it has to do with freedom of expression and speech.  The other doesn't and believes that their self-invented version is transphobic, and in turn they want it censored because feelings.  Personally I have a problem with anyone that wants something censored because it hurts their feelings, in turn I believe that even if something is highly distasteful it should be available for the public to see and each person can decide on their own if they want to look at it or not.

 

The same applies here.  This is not 'part of the story' you do not have to look at it, you don't have to invent flimsy reasons why it hurts your feelings either.  I will say that if someone like George Carlin was alive, it'd be shaking his head in disgust at the number of people who get their panties in a twist over something that offends them.

[Hellraiser789]

 

Was it, though?

 

Because from what I've seen, people were politely pointing out their concerns, Obsidian said they were looking into it, aaand... that's pretty much it. I literally can't find anything more harsh than "this joke is vaguely tasteless, you might want to look into it". But for some reason, this prompted others to start wailing on and on about censorship and evil SJWs making mountains of molehills. Also, harrassment.

 

Bandwagoning indeed.

 

 

Honestly, I think you are quite wrong there. To say it was done "politely" or that they weren't harsh and just pointed out it was "vaguely tasteless" is a complete understatement. Take a look at some twitter posts by icequeenerika (aka #killallmen, the one who started this whole thing). From the way there were acting, I would say that Obsidian had included something that actively, blatantly, and violently discriminated against trans people. Which this joke does not. You can argue its up for interpretation - its not. Its a fairly common joke about a guy getting drunk and finding he slept with a dude. No mention of trans people at all, anywhere. They werent even the butt of the joke - the drunk idiot who killed himself was. The fact is, people were oversensitive about the issue because I guess its common for people to kill themselves after sleeping with trans people? Honestly, never heard of that before, or really any discrimination against trans people. Obviously I am just ignorant and unaware, and that certainly doesn't mean its not hard for them or that they dont suffer because of actually bigoted idiots in the world. But this limerick? Not even about trans people. Not one bit. I swear, I've heard this joke before, maybe seen it in other games or literature or something (or some variation of it - I'd say its pretty common for a dirty limerick). I'm just saying, if they really wanted to stop discrimination against trans people, their efforts are wasted on this limerick.

 

As for the SJW thing, yeah people overreact about the whole censorship thing and the facebook harrassment is terrible and whatnot, but this is the internet - and #killallmen isnt exactly innocent of that kind of thing herself. Her statements for one, but also even bringing this tiny, insignificant joke (that you have to really search for, its not even party of a side quest, let alone the main plot!) and blowing it up to this proportion is kind of ridiculous. Seriously - and all this defense of the SJW - I've got respect for the real SJW who make real change in the world, but these "SJW" on twitter are, as others have said, just using it as an excuse to get attention. From what others have said, they literally jump from cause to cause trying to make "change" but really they just want the attention. Sure all that stuff about facebook and the harrassment is terrible - in a perfect world it wouldn't happen. But to say that she is innocent and "polite", and that she kindly mentioned to take it out is a huge understatement.

 

I'd pull up some quotes, but apparently her tweets are protected now and not open for public view. Which, if she was getting harrassed on facebook and stuff, doesn't surprise me. I'll be honest though, some of the things I've read (on both sides, although the hate for trans is especially cruel and surprising) have been terrible. For the most part, I think the mods have done a good job of keeping that out of these discussions, but I think in another thread someone mentioned some rather hateful messages on steam or something. I can't support that by any means - so good job mod for keeping that stuff out (as far as I can tell).

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I would prefer if someone created a mod that removed the backer content instead of Obsidian doing anything about it(they are probably busy with the bugfixing right now) that way people like the OP or people having a problem with the joke can download that mod and be happy.

 

 

That's a pretty good idea, annoying backer NPCs are annoying. And even though their name-plate-thingies have pretty distinct coloring, in certain lighting conditions, I still managed to confuse them with actual NPCs, causing me to waste valuable seconds on exiting the conversation menu. Such miserable existence!

[AlperTheCaglar]

I think a couple of lines of dialogue pertaining to their soul-past would have been truly wonderful.

 

Like you meet the backer NPC, ask them about their past life, they react in certain ways,

 

Cry

Laugh

Attack you

Pay you

Report you

Curse at you

 

etc.