Firedorn returns

[Ineth]

Remember the controversy after PoE's release, when some thin-skinned people went crazy over an "offensive" backer poem involving a character named Firedorn Lightbringer, and then another group of thin-skinned people went crazy over the fact that it was "censored" and replaced with a different poem?

Good times.

 

Anyways, after the controversy died down I would have expected that to be the last of Firedorn. But apparently Obsidian decided to give him an appearance in the White March Part 1 expansion, as one of the new bounty missions:

 

 

 

 

What do you all make of this?

Edited October 6, 2015 by Ineth

[Gfted1]

Cant remember exactly...wasnt Firedorn transgender? Shouldnt the sex be referred to as "her"?

[LaSpeakeasi]

It offends me that it's 2015 and the mere existence of trans-gendered people offends some people. I may sound sarcastic but I'm also kinda serious. What were they supposed to do kill themselves? Would that make the conservative man-children happy in their little imaginary man-child land?

 

And OBS let the man-children bully them into censoring their ****? I've compared OBS unfavorably before to Bioware before in that regard. And this just proves my point further.

 

PS. as you should never referred to a trans-gendered person in gendered pronouns without asking his or her first. There will be the odd Caitlin who prefers his own pronouns.

Edited October 6, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[gkathellar]

What do you all make of this?

I think Obsidian made an interesting hiring decision when they decided to put REX KRAMER, DANGER SEEKER on the payroll.

[Oralaina]

Personally?  I think the whole thing should be allowed to die a natural (and hopefully quick) death - at least as fast as I kill Firedorn and the group....

 

As far as pronouns IRL - I've used s/he and other ones for many many years:  himmer, hisser, etc, following in Jo Clayton's capable footsteps.  No one should have to be referred to by a gender-spec pronoun in today's world, but I realize I'm pretty alone in that attitude.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Oralaina

[LaSpeakeasi]

As far as pronouns IRL - I've used s/he and other ones for many many years:  himmer, hisser, etc, following in Jo Clayton's capable footsteps.  No one should have to be referred to by a gender-spec pronoun in today's world, but I realize I'm pretty alone in that attitude.

Nah it's a western thing. I speak Cantonese, Mandarin and Japanese. All of those language (in spoken forms) don't have gendered pronouns at all. And people communicated just fine.

 

Or in Japanese's case, the gender is specific to the pronoun not the person. A grown man can just easily use the pronoun for a young female, if he wants to take on the social disposition of one. And it would be socially acceptable.

 

I also happen to think letting controversies quietly die will ultimately do equality a disservice. Even if sometimes it hurts, it's still important that people talk about it. That gives the trans community visibility and a voice. And it's better than avoid them and pretending they don't exist.

 

I always think of sensitivity-related issues as this: the ones affected make up all the rules. Others just follow w/o questioning. I tell **** / race / woman jokes all the time. I'm not gonna stop telling them. Because I find them funny and I'm secure enough about my solidarity with them. But I will still have to apologize if someone says they're offended. It doesn't mean I think I did something wrong. It just means I care about how they feel. That's how human decency works.

Edited October 7, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[Oralaina]

Well yes, it's a lack in our western language (IE English - as derived from Romance and Germanic linguistic roots).  Until the world as a whole produces a world language, we'll be dealing with a broken wheel.  I'm SO not going into the entire background on this forum - for any number of reasons....

 

Suffice it to say that I'm old, and I've spent 60 years or so looking into the reasons for gender bias.  But this is not the forum for that discussion.  As long as game developers offer options.... I'm good with that.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Oralaina

[Ineth]

It offends me that it's 2015 and the mere existence of trans-gendered people offends some people. I may sound sarcastic but I'm also kinda serious. What were they supposed to do kill themselves? Would that make the conservative man-children happy in their little imaginary man-child land?

 

And OBS let the man-children bully them into censoring their ****?

 

No it was the other way around, the people who were offended by the poem and demanded its removal were 'progressive' activists who considered the poem 'transphobic'.

 

You can see both the original and the replacement poem on the wiki page, and judge for yourself.

 

[LaSpeakeasi]

 

It offends me that it's 2015 and the mere existence of trans-gendered people offends some people. I may sound sarcastic but I'm also kinda serious. What were they supposed to do kill themselves? Would that make the conservative man-children happy in their little imaginary man-child land?

 

And OBS let the man-children bully them into censoring their ****?

 

No it was the other way around, the people who were offended by the poem and demanded its removal were 'progressive' activists who considered the poem 'transphobic'.

 

You can see both the original and the replacement poem on the wiki page, and judge for yourself.

 

Wow. The second poem was even more offensive. Like I said, Sensitive messages are always about the listener, not the communicator. If this person thinks his poems can be misread at all, he doesn't know the first thing about writing poems. And the 2nd poem implies he or OBS isn't sorry at all. They are just digging the hole even deeper.

 

Where most people see "hahaha that Firedorn person is such an ass" someone with a personal connection with trans community may say "yeah I know someone who loved someone would rather die than sleep with them". That's the beauty of lyrical literature. Both readings are right. Don't defend it. Just learn your lesson and move on.

 

OBS did a disservice by censoring the situation. The PC police may think they've won. But in reality at least the 1st poem acknowledged the fact that transgender people exist. And that transphobic people also exist. And a discussion can be had about representation; now, there are no trans people in PoE at all.

 

My previous criticism was that OBS avoids controversy. And you never see Bioware do that. Because when people complain about homophobia in Bioware games, they can always point to the fact that your PC can specifically be gay in Dragon Age. OBS doesn't have the same track record. Yes you can hire a male prostitute in a brothel in Ondra's Gift. You could already do that in Neverwinter 13 years ago.

[Vorad]

Obsidian got scared by The Feminazzis and backed off. A true shame indeed allowing cyber-bulling to evolve into a whole new level. If you want to take a look at pure sexist and misanthropic attitude take a look on Twitter(what a pearl of antisocial networking) in crap like #killallmen that will give you a better idea about who these "people" are and what are their beliefs. Taking seriously the Feminazzis and backing off to their whims is the real shame of this story.

 

Regarding the cultural difference on language and gender pronouns the discussion is completely irrelevant. In all Indo-European languages there are gender pronouns that's history, that's tradition that our culture that's language, people should be proud of their traditions without imposing them on others.

 

We communicate just as fine among us, thanks for the concern!

[LaSpeakeasi]

Obsidian got scared by The Feminazzis and backed off. A true shame indeed allowing cyber-bulling to evolve into a whole new level. If you want to take a look at pure sexist and misanthropic attitude take a look on Twitter(what a pearl of antisocial networking) in crap like #killallmen that will give you a better idea about who these "people" are and what are their beliefs. Taking seriously the Feminazzis and backing off to their whims is the real shame of this story.

 

Regarding the cultural difference on language and gender pronouns the discussion is completely irrelevant. In all Indo-European languages there are gender pronouns that's history, that's tradition that our culture that's language, people should be proud of their traditions without imposing them on others.

 

We communicate just as fine among us, thanks for the concern!

You lost me at feminazzis. 

Edited October 7, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[hilfazer]

That was quite a fight. If not for my high levels i'd have to repeat it.

[Ineth]

That was quite a fight. If not for my high levels i'd have to repeat it.

 

Enemy druids are always a pain in the ass. Try the Devŵen bounty mission, it has even more of them.

[Qbert]

This snide quest parallels Obs's reaction to the original controversy.  (based only on the information in this thread, I don't have the expansion)

 

Firedorn is apparently the leader of a cult that seeks to protect evil.

 

Your quest is to kill them to aid the good people who seek to root out this evil.

 

Seems a pointless provocation but I would be surprised if anyone really cared enough to start flaming at this point.

[Torm51]

Obsidian got scared by The Feminazzis and backed off. A true shame indeed allowing cyber-bulling to evolve into a whole new level. If you want to take a look at pure sexist and misanthropic attitude take a look on Twitter(what a pearl of antisocial networking) in crap like #killallmen that will give you a better idea about who these "people" are and what are their beliefs. Taking seriously the Feminazzis and backing off to their whims is the real shame of this story.

 

Regarding the cultural difference on language and gender pronouns the discussion is completely irrelevant. In all Indo-European languages there are gender pronouns that's history, that's tradition that our culture that's language, people should be proud of their traditions without imposing them on others.

 

We communicate just as fine among us, thanks for the concern!

I couldn't agree more.  Its a joke. Stop crying.  If they had a joke about heterosexuals I would not have any problem with it.  People are too sensitive.  I don't CARE what you are.  A joke is a joke get over it.  Those groups can be bullies too.  No one cares if you are trans gender you are people like we are and we will make FUN OF YOU just like we make fun of everyone else.  You are not special.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Torm51

[Torm51]

This snide quest parallels Obs's reaction to the original controversy.  (based only on the information in this thread, I don't have the expansion)

 

Firedorn is apparently the leader of a cult that seeks to protect evil.

 

Your quest is to kill them to aid the good people who seek to root out this evil.

 

Seems a pointless provocation but I would be surprised if anyone really cared enough to start flaming at this point.

I saw the same thing and loved it.  Let the tears rain in.  I am all for helping people and being considerate and accepting of others.  Me accepting you also means I will make fun of you like I make fun of everyone else.  Cause yes you are normal and their are certain quirks about you that I will poke at.  Welcome to the party!

[Torm51]

I am not trying to be insensitive.  What I am trying to say is its time we stop treating trans genders and homo sexuals like they are special because they are "different".  No, they are people who have different sexual preferences and that's it.  We should be able to make fun of them like we make fun of hetero sexual people etc. 

[KDubya]

I did not catch that Firedorn was referencing the poem until I read this thread.

 

I am glad that the Devs wrote Firedorn in to poke fun at the whole perpetually offended crowd.

 

Nobody is special and people need to go to Home Depot, buy a bag of cement and harden the eff up.

[AndreaColombo]

Agreed 100%. The easily offended should grow a spine; this is life, not nursery school.

 

Then again, when some people say "equality" what they really want is preferential treatment. It's part of the whole politically correct lingo, just like advocating for the removal of gender-specific pronouns. Do they offend you? Then it's time you grow up. I call things their name. Calling me "they" to avoid referencing my sex won't change what lies between my legs.

[zered]

Oh not this again

[gkathellar]

Agreed 100%. The easily offended should grow a spine; this is life, not nursery school.

Ah, yes, the old, "you disagree with me? How childish," fallacy. Classic.

 

Then again, when some people say "equality" what they really want is preferential treatment.

Absolutely true. The beneficiaries of a society's discrimination do often believe that they are being treated equally to others, and many see even simple shifts in favor of a fair society as a direct blow to what is fairly theirs. This isn't surprising or even especially indicative of bad character, as accepting that one has been the passive beneficiary of ingrained social advantages undermines pride in one's own achievements.

 

This is why simply requesting accurate demographic representation in media typically becomes a minefield - a kind of groupthink attitude of "they're taking away what's ours," sets in among those who feel the inclusion of others excludes them. When Yale allowed its first female students, for instance, the college actually had to expand its class size from 1,000 to 1,300 in order to quell outrage. Many donors, alumni and commentators felt that if women were put in the spots that had been previously been allotted to men and men only, this would somehow constitute a theft of opportunity; they reasoned that having women's colleges was surely enough, and that ending gender segregation in education would surely be harmful to young men everywhere.

 

Roughly the same rationale prevailed in the United States among the many pro-segregation whites who saw themselves as opponents of racism in the 1950s and 60s. "Separate but equal" was not just an excuse, but rather something many Americans believed deeply in - their concern was not with the separation, but lack of equality. This ignored, of course, that asking black Americans to build a second society underlying "white America" was inherently unequal and deeply racist.

 

In reality, accommodating for the differences of others is a simple moral obligation. But for those who have been accommodated for their entire lives, the concept seems to unduly burden them. They feel their opportunities have been taken from them. It's a dangerous thought in part because those opportunities were stolen in the first place, and in part because life is not a zero sum game. Social integration leads to economic empowerment, which creates demand on the part of newly minted consumers, which in turn creates economic opportunity.

 

This is not some kind of abstract thesis - there is a wealth of evidence that open societies see overall economic benefits. I'll give a personal anecdote, as well - following the legalization of gay marriage in the United States, I observed a rainbow-colored MasterCard float at the NYC pride parade, proudly implying that MasterCard should be the credit card of gay people everywhere. Was that cheap, empty, and commercially driven? Absolutely, and that's the point: even our capitalist masters understand that more participants in our shared culture means more customers to sell to.

 

Opening up society creates exchange and enrichment, both metaphorical and quite literal. It is a shame that so many of those already empowered by a system that favors them don't see the benefits of sharing the sun, but it's the reality of human psychology, and something we must struggle tirelessly against.

 

It's part of the whole politically correct lingo, just like advocating for the removal of gender-specific pronouns.

I find that in practice, "political correctness" usually just means "correctness." Slurs, degrading language, and misused terms serve to misinform and occlude as much as to insult and isolate. That's the right of the individual, I suppose, but one should expect to be called out in exercising that right. The evolution of a "pc lingo," such as it were, is the effort to be clear and precise in our language - for academic purposes, as often as not.

 

In this case, what this boils down to is that when you insist on calling a transgender woman "he," you aren't just being an ****, but also factually incorrect. Human beings are polymorphously perverse and always have been - the Ancient Greeks believed in four genders, and a third gender has existed in parts of the Indian subcontinent for centuries. I raise this to remind you that being genderqueer is not a fad. Transgendered people have been part of human history, and will continue to be. Recognizing that in our language is a simple matter of accuracy and authenticity.

 

Do they offend you? Then it's time you grow up.

I'm curious, did Muhammad Ali need to "grow up" and go to Vietnam?

 

I call things their name.

"Call a spade a spade," eh? You know, the funny thing about that phrase is that spade is actually an archaic slur for a black person.

 

But I agree, you should call things what they are. You should also be prepared to acknowledge that things are more complex than you had thought, and that language evolves over time to express that complexity.

 

Calling me "they" to avoid referencing my sex won't change what lies between my legs.

No, but addressing people with pronouns and descriptors they feel comfortable with can contribute, however slightly, to a broader, less alienating world - at a cost of no significant effort. If your only reason not to do so is that expanding your vocabulary slightly is too much work, then ... well. There's nothing I can say in the face of that degree of intellectual laziness. Edited October 8, 2015 by gkathellar

[LaSpeakeasi]

Agreed 100%. The easily offended should grow a spine; this is life, not nursery school.

 

Then again, when some people say "equality" what they really want is preferential treatment. It's part of the whole politically correct lingo, just like advocating for the removal of gender-specific pronouns. Do they offend you? Then it's time you grow up. I call things their name. Calling me "they" to avoid referencing my sex won't change what lies between my legs.

So you admit that the most important thing you see in a person is their gender? No wonder you think equality equals preferential treatment.

 

"I call this person a woman because she has a uterus so I've already made up my mind about what her role in society should be and I will treat her accordingly. If she dare defy my expectation i.e. demand same pay as men or have sex with whoever she wants she must be asking for preferential treatment. I can't allow that because I'm too narrow-minded to adapt my behavior to accommodate other people."

 

News flash. We live in a world of preferential treatment. Men are treated preferably to women. Heterosexuals are treated preferably to gays. Sis-gendered are treated preferably to trans-gendered. Stop pretending life is better than nursery school.

Edited October 8, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[KDubya]

 

Agreed 100%. The easily offended should grow a spine; this is life, not nursery school.

 

Then again, when some people say "equality" what they really want is preferential treatment. It's part of the whole politically correct lingo, just like advocating for the removal of gender-specific pronouns. Do they offend you? Then it's time you grow up. I call things their name. Calling me "they" to avoid referencing my sex won't change what lies between my legs.

So you admit that the most important thing you see in a person is their gender? No wonder you think equality equals preferential treatment.

 

"I call this person a woman because I think she has a uterus and I've always made up my mind about what her role in society should be and I will treat her according to how I expect her to behave. If she dare defy my expectation i.e. demand same pay as men or have sex with whoever she wants she must be asking for preferential treatment. I can't allow that because I'm too narrow-minded to adapt my behavior to accommodate other people."

 

News flash. We live in a world of preferential treatment. Men are treated preferably to women. Heterosexuals are treated preferably to gays. Sis-gender are treated preferably than trans-gendered. Stop pretending life is better than nursery school.

 

 

In today's Victim society if you can't claim victim status you're SOL. I'm a white male so everyone can treat me badly since I can not be a victim since I don't happen to be homosexual or even dress up like a woman from time to time.

 

The statistics used to show that women are paid less do NOT take into account that many women choose to leave the workforce for a period of years to raise their kids and also generally choose careers that allow for more time away from work in order to care for their families. If you limit the comparison to career ladder types who work 60+ hours per week in high pressure fields you'll see that the pay is comparable. When women start to choose to raise their families via a voice on the phone like many successful men do you'll see similar payscales.

 

If someone does not want to bake you a cake just go to another baker, maybe even start a protest to inform others that the baker won't bake your cake and steer some business away. But why throw the power of the courts at them in order to crush them and drive them into bankruptcy? I'm surprised they weren't sent to re-education camps, they worked for Mao didn't they?

 

Why is there a Black Congressional Caucus? Just imagine if there was a White Caucus.

 

Why is La Raza and MEChA allowed on campus, and even has a member on the Supreme Court? When your motto is "for the race everything, for everyone else nothing" Again if they were a bunch of white people doing that they'd be in jail and called Nazis.

 

Take president Obama, change his race and he never wins the election. People voted their guilt that has been instilled in them by popular culture for the last forty years.

 

Senator Elizabeth Warren, AKA Fauxcahontas or Liawatha, pretended to be a Native American in order to enhance her career. She was found out to be a fraud and a liar and still won an election.

 

Hillary Clinton is the Democrats front runner and her only accomplishment in life is that she is a woman and she did not divorce Bill Clinton.

 

Cry me a river about how the evil white men are keeping everyone else down. In today's society victims have the power.

[LaSpeakeasi]

 

 

Agreed 100%. The easily offended should grow a spine; this is life, not nursery school.

 

Then again, when some people say "equality" what they really want is preferential treatment. It's part of the whole politically correct lingo, just like advocating for the removal of gender-specific pronouns. Do they offend you? Then it's time you grow up. I call things their name. Calling me "they" to avoid referencing my sex won't change what lies between my legs.

So you admit that the most important thing you see in a person is their gender? No wonder you think equality equals preferential treatment.

 

"I call this person a woman because I think she has a uterus and I've always made up my mind about what her role in society should be and I will treat her according to how I expect her to behave. If she dare defy my expectation i.e. demand same pay as men or have sex with whoever she wants she must be asking for preferential treatment. I can't allow that because I'm too narrow-minded to adapt my behavior to accommodate other people."

 

News flash. We live in a world of preferential treatment. Men are treated preferably to women. Heterosexuals are treated preferably to gays. Sis-gender are treated preferably than trans-gendered. Stop pretending life is better than nursery school.

 

 

In today's Victim society if you can't claim victim status you're SOL. I'm a white male so everyone can treat me badly since I can not be a victim since I don't happen to be homosexual or even dress up like a woman from time to time.

 

The statistics used to show that women are paid less do NOT take into account that many women choose to leave the workforce for a period of years to raise their kids and also generally choose careers that allow for more time away from work in order to care for their families. If you limit the comparison to career ladder types who work 60+ hours per week in high pressure fields you'll see that the pay is comparable. When women start to choose to raise their families via a voice on the phone like many successful men do you'll see similar payscales.

 

I keep hearing this about straight white men being treated badly. I feel for you bro. And I gotta ask, what did people do? Because for me, being treated badly means working in a coffee shop to pay for college and have random stranger telling me to "**** off back to China or wherever I came from". Or walking down the street in hot pants, being cat called and threatened with rape; Or hearing politicians on TV saying people like me should be stoned. Must be hard to have something like that happen to you *just because* you're straight, white and male. No seriously. Let's stop doing that to each other.

 

Or in the words of Louis CK, "what can you possibly say to a white man that would hurt his feelings?"

 

Funny you should mention that about women's career choices. Because: 1) How many high profile CEOs do you see are men and how many are women? 2) Why do you think women take time from their careers to raise children? Could it be because society expect them to? How come men don't get to take a few years off and raise children without being frowned upon?

 

Your points basically just argue themselves.

Edited October 8, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[KDubya]

You see more men as CEOs because more men work in the high pressure fields that are required to get to that level. When everyone is working 60+ hours per week you need to do the same. When men pursue their careers to that extent they can still find a wife who'll raise the kids either full time stay at home or pursuing a less strenuous career which allows for some time with the kids. Women are further hampered by their more limited options for having a family life as well as a career. They'd have a harder time finding a Mr. Mom to stay at home or a husband who works in a field where there is ample free time available for a family. Throw in the issues of having the wife greatly out earning her husband and you have a recipe for a divorce or at least an unhappy partnership.

 

Biology also works against women. A woman who wants her own family is either going to have to take time away from her career path or have her kids raised by strangers. Also you need to consider that you'd want to have your kids before you are forty. This is the age range where the future leaders separate themselves from the pack and rise to the top of a very competitive culture. Dropping out of the race pretty much takes you out of consideration. Also the mere chance that a woman might later choose to drop out in order to have kids is going to factor into the career decisions made by her superiors throughout her career. At a competency parity level, the difference between who gets the promotion and who doesn't is going to be influenced by who might leave to have kids and who won't. Unless there are artificial constraints like quotas involved.

 

A man can have a first marriage where he did not see his family much but achieved great career success, get divorced, marry a much younger woman and then have another set of kids even if he is in his sixties. Older men gain character and distinction, older women just get old.