What Belongs in the Game?

[Virgil]

Keeping with the philosophy theme, I just read Harassment - Sexual Orientation [http://www.innewsweekly.com/innews/?class_code=Ga&article_code=1172] clause. According to the article, the response given when asked for clarification was "We have determined that advertising sexual orientation is not appropriate for the high fantasy setting of the World of Warcraft and is therefore not permitted."

I find it difficult to find a position on an issue like this. On one hand, the intent was certainly not harassment. On the other hand, it would inevitably cause problems, as anyone ever in a global chat in an MMO would know. It seems like the easiest solution, and the one requested by Blizzard, is almost a virtual 'don't ask, don't tell' policy. Of course, then you need to think of where you draw the line. Would it be more/less apropriate to advertise a guild as Christian? How about Muslim? Mexican? Black? Female Players? Is it acceptable to make a guild that only allows users of one nationality for national pride reasons (Aussie only!)? What about excluding a nationality (No Norwegians?)?

I don't know. I don't like any of the conclusions I come up with, and I think I'd rather see none of them at all: pride, hate, or otherwise. I understand the appeal of creating/joining a group with things in common with you, especially something you feel strongly about, but I just don't like dragging these issues into a world that doesn't need them. I'll be an orc, and that's all anyone needs to know.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Gus Mastrapa
http://www.lookytouchy.com
If homophobia weren't so pervasive in online worlds, this wouldn't be as much as an issue. I can't blame players for trying to make a safe place for themselves within Azeroth where they don't have to bite their tongue every time their guildmates make an insensitive comment. Where an offhand comment about race would be immediately decried, we still live in a time when homophobic slurs and slights are simply laughed.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Mory Buckman
http://i-m-not.blogspot.com
I don't see why the player's out-of-game identities should have any impact on the internal game. This may just be an ignorant question, as I've never actually played WoW or any other MMOG for that matter, but would bringing sexuality into the game's world not just divert attention from the more important issues which are actually integral to the game?

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Chris Dahlen
http://www.savetherobot.com
To your last point, Jason - why can't an orc just be an orc? - in my experience with WOW, nobody really roleplays. You can tell that you're in a world with a bunch of other people who are sitting at their computers, grinding to the next level; it has about as much suspension of disbelief as a college scavenger hunt. So if people aren't getting "in character," what would you exclude? Here's a harmless example: sometimes people watch a football game on TV while they're playing and talk about it on the general chat. One time I saw a character named ColtsFan, and I even said "Go Colts!" on my way by.

So as the debates over sexuality go on, I have a hard time assuming that people are role-playing or immersing themselves in the game, and that that immersion is somehow getting wrecked.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Mark

It's largely a matter of controversy, I think. Advertising something controversial - something sexual or political (religious statements aren't as touchy in online worlds, I find, and I might be able to figure out why) - is asking for trouble.

In addition, the existence of a "GLBT friendly" guild would seem to imply that most or all other guilds aren't "GLBT friendly" - which, in addition to being false, would be an implication that could do serious damage to Blizzard's PR. Guilds may be player-run organizations, but any guild that isn't (at least publicly) "GLBT friendly" is in violation of Billzrd's Harassment Policy. For this reason, advertising that a guild is GLBT friendly is not only inflammatory, but redundant.

Let's try it with another example. What would happen if someone decided to make and advertise in-game for a "Republican friendly" or "Democrat friendly" guild in WoW - or perhaps guilds that were exclusive to a certain political party? Even if such a statement were technically within the Harassment Policy, would you, as a GM, want to have to put up with the resultant flaming? Better to nip it in the bud, in my opinion.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: parkbench

How is it not possible for in-game characters to be gay? How is it not possible for in-game characters to be sexual?

Last time I checked, there's, what, 4 million WoW players or so?

Who are all their mothers?

Hate to tell you, but these races, if keeping 'within character,' *definitely have sex*, unless they're asexual. And any sexual race would logically statistically include those of other sexual orientations. Sure, you may cringe, but I'm sure there's a male orc sucking some other male orc's dick somewhere. Who cares?

Besides--even though I think religion is dumb, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with a religious guild. Only cowards would try to stamp out their existence like that.

I'm also hesitant to believe that most guilds 'are' GLBT friendly. Homophobia is rampant in online games, and I've found more often than not that it can be a problem, even in guilds. Especially in guilds. All it is saying is that bigotry will not be tolerated.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Haarball
http://haarball.wordpress.com
Excluding Norwegians? Outrageous! We've got hot blonde chicks!

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Pat M.

I can understand Blizzard's desire to alleviate stress on the GMs, of course.

What bugs me is that this incident was provoked by the creation of a GLBT-friendly guild, and not any one of dozens of blatantly sexual acts that have occurred in WoW before. Blizzard's interpretation of "high fantasy" entails giving certain races and characters revealing outfits and /dance commands not unlike that of a stripper, and it's taken for granted that people cyber in WoW just like they do pretty much anywhere else. But wait - they're queer? WHOA WHOA WHOA that's just not high fantasy guys, sorry.

I also find the idea that we could somehow remove sexual orientation from the social element of the game somewhat appalling. Yes, if the game were just nothing but running through new instances and gold farming and such, perhaps that would be feasible, but MMOs thrive because of their demand for social interaction, and when you have people interacting with other people you can't ignore how issues of race, class, nationality, gender, and sexuality inform how they interact. I don't know who you are or how you identify, Jason, but the idea that we can somehow push aside this kind of thing is very much a part of heterosexual privilege. Blizzard is trying to simply sweep issues of sexuality under the rug and I don't think the queer gamers of WoW will appreciate it. Hell, I know this is something that would make me quit, if I played, and I don't even identify as GLBT.

Finally, I don't agree with the argument that advertising one's guild as 'GLBT-friendly' automatically paints all the other guilds as "GLBT-unfriendly". I am involved with several Asian American organizations on my college campus, and we have never encountered, externally or internally, the assumption that to label ourselves as such was to contend that all other organizations are NOT friendly to Asian Americans. Different organizations have different purposes, and I imagine this is the same for guilds as it is for other organizations.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: SKTurner

Pat M., I agree with you wholly.

People may not be in favor of the inclusion of GLBT issues in the game, but the fact remains that the content lies in the game already in the form of the social interaction. Blizzard may have rules about what can be done in game, but they can't control everything. I can't fault a gay man who wants to join a guild in which enemies won't be referred to as "gay" or other more harmful synonyms (such as the "f" word) on TeamSpeak.

Blizzard isn't curing the disease, they're curing the symptom.

 

[Virgil]

If homophobia weren't so pervasive in online worlds...I'm not going to disagree with you there - the reactions of the masses are what I was referring to as causing problems. I don't think it's just homophobia that's the problem though, there's a whole host of other identifiers that could be equally as problematic (Arabic, Muslim, Chinese, etc). Would they have gotten the same reaction from Blizzard? I don't know, but it's interesting to consider.

I think everyone here can agree that respect and civility towards others is something missing from MMOs (and the internet and world in general).To your last point, Jason - why can't an orc just be an orc? - in my experience with WOW, nobody really roleplays.I actually didn't intend that to be a statement about roleplaying - to be honest, I'm usually not much of a roleplayer, unless I'm around them. My real point there was that if you see me in a game I'm just a collection of pixels. I'm just some guy (probably) on the internet, and I have no race, religion, sexual preference, or otherwise. Likewise, I don't particularily want to know that sort of information about the multitudes of players. To me, it's not a part of the game experience, and I find it more important to learn whether or not someone is "good people" than anything else - and I don't need any of that other information to learn that. I don't know who you are or how you identify, Jason, but ....I don't identify, that was actually my point. I'm one of these people who hoped that the internet really could be a place without race, color, etc....Finally, I don't agree with the argument that advertising one's guild as 'GLBT-friendly' automatically paints all the other guilds as "GLBT-unfriendly". I am involved with several Asian American organizations...I was really more curious as to where the line gets drawn in general, not for this specific incident. Common reasoning seems to say that it should be fine to promote a guild as "friendly" to a minority, and presumably also social organizations. Most of these don't make sense though, as it would be rather strange to label yourself 'Democrat-friendly' or 'Teamster-friendly'. This is because advertising something as 'friendly' does imply that others places are not, at least on some level. A 'family-friendly' restauraunt is certainly trying to imply that other restauraunts are not going to be as welcoming of children. Likewise, 'GLBT friendly' is implying that most other guilds would not be, which (sadly) could very well be true.

Certainly one wouldn't think that an Asian-American organization would be claiming other organizations weren't friendly to Asian Americans, but it's really the opposite side of the coin. Calling a group an "Asian American organization" is implying that the group is exclusionary - as a non-Asian American, I wouldn't naturally expect to be able to join. Is this a bad thing? No - race and culture are certainly major forces in the real world, and these shared experiences are probably a large part of being a member. But does that same organization belong being promoted in an online game, where those forces aren't directly relevant? That's a tougher question, IMO.Blizzard isn't curing the disease, they're curing the symptom.I don't think we could expect anything more - even banning everyone who ever makes a derogatory remark to or about someone else would be nothing more than that. Can't cure society - I just wish it didn't have to be in the game.

Excluding Norwegians? Outrageous! We've got hot blonde chicks!Damn. But if we allow the Norwegians in, would we have to exclude the Swedes instead? I know there's a rivalry there

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: SKTurner

I understand what you're saying here about excluding personal traits (i.e. sexual persuasion, religion, whatever...), but you have to ask yourself if the world of the game enforces, or even rewards that behavior. Players have already brought in things that reference the outside world, derogatory statements made in real life are used in game. It's not easy to say that everyone should just be a blank slate, because you can't help but take some of your culture with you when you interact with other people.

What I mean by this is not that it would be impossible for GLBT peoples to fit in with people of other guilds, or even that they wouldn't be able to mask their sexuality and treat it as something that doesn't matter in the game (because honestly, it really doesn't). What my opinion is that those on TeamSpeak or in other guilds are fully able to bring a culture of hate into the game in spaces that Blizzard can't protect.

The purpose of these GLBT-friendly guilds is not to create a place for seperate cultural identities, it's to create a place that's safe from offensive and derogatory remarks and of people who accept a culture of hate. I can imagine a GLBT-frienly guild whose members never bring up the issue of gender, but sadly I can't imagine a normal guild in which one person wouldn't make such a remark as "Dude, don't be gay, that was my kill."

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Pat M.

SKTurner took the words right out of my mouth. Or keyboard. Whatever.

When we exclude sexuality from the bounds of acceptable discourse in World of Warcraft, we reinforce the presumption that everyone is straight. Ditto for race, gender, class, and so on. The idea that the Internet could be a place free of race, class, gender, sexuality, and all other axes of identification seems appealing at first, until you realize how stifling it is for the individuals of the the not-so-privileged groups to live, work, and play in a world that assumes they are middle-class straight white males.

But enough of the ethnic studies lectures. Perhaps I'll turn this into an article pitch.

Do I expect Blizzard to take a proactive step towards ending homophobia? Of course not. But to actively promote the heteronormative standard has impacts that go far, far beyond the next instance farming run. The unfortunate fact is that Blizzard has gone out of their way to declare themselves "GLBT Unfriendly" and I really hoped they would have thought this out a little bit more thoroughly before doing so.

 

[Virgil]

When we exclude sexuality from the bounds of acceptable discourse in World of Warcraft, we reinforce the presumption that everyone is straight. Ditto for race, gender, class, and so on.Just as a quick update, it looks like this is actually the path Blizzard is taking - there is now an

"However, topics related to sensitive real-world subjects - such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example - have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment."

The statement goes on to say that in order to "promote a positive game environment... We prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast."

"This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community website, serves as one open avenue for doing so."

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Pat M.

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN.

at least they won't moderate it out of the Guild Recruitment forum.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Mark

Pat M.:

The unfortunate fact is that Blizzard has gone out of their way to declare themselves "GLBT Unfriendly"


I'm not seeing that. In fact, it seems to me that Blizzard bending over backwards to not seem that way using the most diplomatic language possible. They wouldn't have to publicly reiterate the assertion that they've made this decision to react to potential controversy if they weren't concerned about people thinking that they were being discriminatory.

Quite frankly, in a game world, I don't want to hop in and find myself in the middle of a flame war - and what could be more likely to spawn a flame war than a controversiolly religiously, politically, or sexually-motivated guild advertising itself in-game? Blizzard has a responsibility (a responsibility owed to their checkbooks, but a responsibility nevertheless) to keep the game world enjoyable and fair. Communication in WoW should be as free as possible, but at the same time it is not, nor was it intended to be, a forum for discourse. To that end, I support Blizzard's decision to curtail controversial in-game speech.

If that's a position you disagree with, then by all means, disagree. But - and I'm not speaking to anybody in particular now - disagree honestly, rather than on the grounds of nonexistant malice or discrimination.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Pat M.

Mark,

I wouldn't argue that Blizzard has a fiscal responsibility to do what they've done. I also wouldn't contest that Blizzard is using the most diplomatic language possible to try and come off as anything less than discriminatory. And in light of Blizzard's recent clarification (that they will permit this kind of advertising on their guild recruitment forum) I am mildly reassured.

However. I think it would be irresponsible to refrain from pointing out the political consequences of what they chose to do. Running a business does not wholly excuse one from worrying about anything other than one's bottom line, after all. And whether WoW was intended to be a forum for discourse or not isn't the point; I don't expect that people routinely get into intellectually stimulating discussions on the political nature of sexuality while they're casting Magic Missile. What I find so problematic is:
- That this issue didn't come up until queer sexuality started creeping into the game-world, and
- That Blizzard's idea of a "positive game environment" is one where everyone is presumed to be straight. Ponder this for a second: girl gaming guilds regularly crop up in all sorts of game environments. No doubt being an 'outed' female in a predominantly male game world leads to all sorts of unwelcome attention, but the reverse - to simply 'pass' as being male like everyone else - prevents certain options like using teamspeak from being a viable option. And yet, we don't see Blizzard, or anyone else, demanding anything similar for the FragDolls. Whether the game world is intended to be a forum for discourse or not, the burden of having to 'pass' as the norm rests squarely on the minority players.

Calling their decision "malicious" is certainly a bit too strong. But discriminatory? Certainly.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: SKTurner

While I agree that the new "anti-friendly" policy isn't going to help, I wouldn't quite completely agree with you, Pat.

To say that Blizzard is promoting (whether they mean to or not) a norm of heterosexuality doesn't seem right. The fact is that heterosexuality is seen as a norm in the real world, and that view is taken into the game by the players. I'd rather say that Blizzard's positive game environment is one in which players bring no cultural values or personal attributes into the mechanics of the game. In Blizzard's mind, creating a guild marked "GLBT-friendly" would welcome other players to bring their cultural values into the game by hunting out those guild members and harrasing them.

The way I see GLBT-friendly guilds is that they are ways to help players keep their personal attributes outside the game by harboring gay players from hateful viewpoints. The problem of getting rid of these guilds is forcing GLBT players to be exposed to players who often make offensive comments (usually without meaning any deliberate harm to any person). In a game, that isn't very fun.

Pat, I feel that you are arguing for GLBT-friendly guilds, and correct me if I'm wrong, for the purpose of highlighting a social issue and making other players more aware of the community, while perhaps giving GLBT players a "place" to discuss cultural issues in-game. It's here that I would agree with Blizzard that such divisions should be kept in the outside world, and any discussion on these topics should be done on an individual level, and not inside the game mechanics. Don't get me wrong, I've got no problem with people expressing their personal opinions, sexuality, race, religion, whatever in the game. I just think that groups specifically advertising their stance on these things can bring some problems.

And after saying all that, I still think it's important to have a community that abides by stricter rules than the game's. Blizzard may punish players who make derogatory statements, but they can't control what happens in TeamSpeak, and they certainly can't control or stop all casual uses of offensive terms. A guild, however, has more control.

This doesn't seem to have any simple answer. I guess I would say I'm in favor of limiting how a guild can be advertised in-game, but not outside. In other words, I'm in favor of any way that would allow these guilds' positions to be visible, but not overly noticable in the game.

I think. Maybe.

 

[Virgil]

Original Comment by: Mark

Nobody's assuming that every WoW player is straight, least of all Blizzard. I'm not quite sure why you think that this assumption is present. All I see here is a company who provides a virtual environment pre-emptively stopping morons from trolling members of this guild (and violating the harrasment policy in the process). Blizzard knows that they don't have the manpower to deal with a large-scale flamewar driven by persistent idiots shouting "Oz [the guild] is for fags!" and effectively preventing the guild from having any sort of meaningful experience in their game. The assumption that other guilds aren't GLBT-friendly could easily arise in such an environment as players defending Oz jump into the fray. Not only would such a situation be extremely unpleasant and inappropriate for nearly all of their paying customers, it would be beyond the scope of their GMs to handle it judiciously and within a reasonable timeframe.

Blizzard really didn't have any other options. It was either allow their game to erupt into virtual riots, or find and politely present a contractually tenable reason to prevent the cause of it. This was the best choice they could have made not only from a fiscal position, but from the position of creating a fair and enjoyable environment.