EA Hosting Panel on Homophobia in Gaming

[shaltir]

i'm not hateful nor bigoted. and i agree, you guys deserve the same rights as everyone else, but it gets taken too far with the gay pride parades and stores. there is a difference of wanting equal rights and wanting everyone to cater to your sexuality.

and for the record, stop stealing our stuff...i want the rainbow, the superman logo and key west back dangit!!

Another example-I believe gays should be treated exactly the same as everyone else, and you assume that a) I am gay and b) I want special rights for gays. The best part is you still maintain that nobody really cares about sexual orientation anymore, despite the fact that you hear "fag" as the standard insult all over ol games.

As for the parades, an argument can certainly be made that they are not the most effective form of advocacy. What cannot be argued is whether or not more advocacy is necessary. Gays may have "their own" bookstores and they may have stolen Key West from you but they still cannot marry.

alright, good point. i agree, gays should be allowed to get married, but if the pastor/priest believes that it is a sin (i'm not religious btw so this is just blahblahblah) they should not be forced to marry a gay couple if they do not feel it is right.

 

[boholikeu]

Obviously fair solution: Crack equally on anyone using terms to designate sexual orientation, whether it's someone listing LGBT in their profile, a "1337" gamer shouting "gay" in multiplayer, or a straight person with the profile name "Ilikechicks42".

 

[squid5580]

XBL is a virtual world not a real one. The real world is not controlled by a company to make money. If the owner of the theatre decided that having the mixed race couple in his or her theatre decided that they were a problem and he or she would lose alot of money having them there he or she should have the right to ask them to leave, sit in separate seats ect ect. And you know that there would be protesting and accusations of bigotry and yada yada yada even though he or she is just trying to protect thier investment. Doesn't mean he or she is in any way racist. That is just one of the tougher decisions an owner has to make for the greater good of thier wallet.

there's a reason the vast majority of theater owners don't do this. the protests and accusations of bigotry would cost them much, much more than serving interracial couples ever could. for that matter, how would allowing interracial couples cost them any business at all?

I am also sure if you asked different interracial couples some would say they would be much happier being turned away at the door or sitting apart than facing abuse for the entire length of the movie. No matter how hurt thier feelings might be.

wrong. none would. if they were abused in a theater they may move their seats or choose to leave of their own volition, but it's their decision and the theater owner shouldn't have any business making the decision for them.

And what I love the most about this thread everyone likes to say well it just shouldn't happen while no one has put forth a viable solution that doesn't involve banning outright one group or another. Seems to me that MS has a problem that can't be easily solved without offending someone (other than the tools already provided for all XBL users that only a few of us actually know about like the block communication and mute player option).

i posted <a href=http://kotaku.com/5311939/guest-oped-the-impact-of-homophobia-in-virtual-communities>this once already, but it probably got lost in all the walls and walls of text. here's the relevant portion again:

While most companies do have some sort of policy in place that prohibits threats, advocating violence or death, and hate speech, there are major concerns with the effectiveness of those policies. Those concerns including the policies themselves, which in some cases ban self-identifying your orientation or using words like "gay" or "lesbian" altogether. They also include the mechanisms in place to report violations of the policies, many which don't allow you to submit evidence (i.e. recordings of in game audio/video). Then there is the lack of transparency once a user has been reported, leaving the harassed often feeling as if nothing has been done.

in short, remove the ban on sexual orientation, while creating a stronger reporting system with feedback to the reporting party. since you brought up that few people know how to use the existing tools, better educating users on those functions should be part of the solution too.

The problem is voice chat leaves no evidence. If someone calls a homosexual a derogatory name over XBL during a match there is nothing they can do about it. There is no proof. And like I said there is no way a system like that wouldn't be abused. So the solution offered is you don't have to listen to it. Here are the tools needed. Now if that was good enough then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And to use those functions are simple. If you ever looked at another profile you would see them (well providing the user can read, some of the converations I have heard make me wonder). I think (though I am not 100% right now) even recieving a message gives you the option to "block communications" which means you would never ever recieve another message from that user (well profile, 1 could make as many profiles as they wanted to). And spending the 20 minutes making a profile to send off bad messages seems like alot of work. And if you reported it to XBL I am sure there would be a full console ban in the near future.

And none of this changes the fact when she put in her profile that she was a lesbian it was a violation of the rules. If you don't like or agree with the rules that is fine. Fight them on it. Fight them the proper way. You can't just say well I don't agree so here is my middle finger MS you can sit on it and rotate til you get to my elbow then the ride is over and you have to find your own way off. And then violate the rules (no matter how right or wrong) without consequence no matter who you are or what demographic you fall into that isn't right.

I think this is where alot of people have come to misunderstand some of what I have been saying. I don't care what side you are on. It doesn't matter to me if you are gay, straight or bi. She broke the rules and it seems like everone is saying well it is ok cuz the rule is unfair. That doesn't make it ok to do what she did. If you want to be able to put I am a homosexual in your profile I don't care. If you are allowed I still don't care. Thinking it is ok to break the rules and get away with it because you are a "minority" is when I step back and ask WTF?? What happened to equality?

And speaking of equality if you are allowed to put your sexual preference in your profile then wouldn't the same be allowed for the anti gay group? Could they not put in thiers "homosexuality is wrong". "Homosexuals disgust me" and on and on (note that I didn't include religion or make any threats since you can say something anti gay without either therefore no breakage of the code and conduct) since they could argue being anti gay is just as much a part of them as being gay is to a homosexual? Will it not hurt since you are allowed to express yourself now. Afterall it is drilled into our heads from our churches, our traditions and most of the media that hetrosexuality is right and therefore becomes just as much as a part of us as your feelings are to you.

 

[squid5580]

Why--do homophobic remarks leave behind less evidence than racist ones?

I dunno guess we'll have to wait for MS to have a panel about racism on XBL to find that one out won't we?

I don't think the rest of us need a panel to figure that one out...

Apparently you do. Can you prove without a shadow of a doubt that you heard someone on XBL call you or another player the N word during a match? Can you then prove which of the 15 other people in the room said it? And the million dollar question can you prove that it wasn't you?


No I am not accusing you of using a word like that. It is just that easy to do it.

 

[squid5580]

Why--do homophobic remarks leave behind less evidence than racist ones?

I dunno guess we'll have to wait for MS to have a panel about racism on XBL to find that one out won't we?

I don't think the rest of us need a panel to figure that one out...

Apparently you do. Can you prove without a shadow of a doubt that you heard someone on XBL call you or another player the N word during a match? Can you then prove which of the 15 other people in the room said it? And the million dollar question can you prove that it wasn't you?


No I am not accusing you of using a word like that. It is just that easy to do it.

Um...I think you misunderstood me. I was asking why you think a racist word will leave any more evidence than a homophobic one: in other words, your problem is with the system itself, not specifically with adding homophobic speech to all the other kinds of speech already in violation of the XBL code of conduct.

Ok I am probably going to take ALOT of heat for this one. I think the system isn't perfect and we can't expect it to be. Like a said a few pages ago that it would cost MS more to monitor every word said in every match than they would make. I also don't agree with Sony's policy of straight up censorship in their chat either. Seeing "you dirty little ****" you know what was said. Maybe not the exact words but you get the point. So to me MS is doing the best they can without dividing the entire community or taking our chat privileges.

This leads me to my second beef. The sensitivity. I am in no way condoning racial/homophobic slurs. Nor am I saying I approve of people attacking and insulting each other on XBL using those kinds of words (I have no problems calling you a dick or an asshole if you kill me) but there is a line and the racial/homophobic slurs are across said line. On that note if someone calls you that you can't throw down your mic and cry about it. Then go to your nearest forum and accuse the entire XBL community of being a bunch of bigots. For lack of better words (and no offense ladies since my wife hates it when I tell her to do this but) MAN UP!!

Which draws to the conclusion. They do have a system in place. One that allows us to moderate what we do and don't want to hear. If you are in a room or a match and some person uses the N word every 2 seconds mute him. Like I said it isn't a nice word and it isn't one I like to hear myself but I also can't reach through the internet and give him or her a good punch in the face. Sure you can try and reason with them but I have never seen that work yet.

I guess the system really isn't the problem. It is the people that are. And that is something a panel or a discussion can't change. And before someone goes on about education and how educating people will make a difference let me offer this point of view. A racist isn't going to stop being a racist if you tell them that calling a black person a N word hurts thier feelings. Just because they are racist doesn't mean they lack intelligence (smarts maybe). Do you not think telling a racist that calling black people the N word hurts the black person is just reaffirming what he already knows? And if it the black person themselves saying it well that is a victory for the racist. Same rule applies to homosexuals and homophobic remarks. The bigger the deal made the bigger the victory for the wrong side.

 

[scotth266]

Heterosexual white male speaking here: You're missing her point, just like you missed my point in the Right Wing/Conservative/Internet Tough Guy thread.

Not to bait you, but that was locked for a reason. Likely the same reason that I pointed out.

This is not a generalization: this is pointing out that this kind of stupidity only exists in one group.

That statement has so many holes in it I could use it to strain noodles.

What heterosexual white males don't realize is that, like the poster says in the part you quoted, you don't need to declare you're an HWM because you're the 'standard' model--just by declaring you exist, you've declared you're an HWM--that's what society assumes you are until proven different.

Perhaps that's what YOU think society assumes. You're rather pessimistic then.

This is not a generalization with HUGE exceptions to it: it, much like my thread title, is a poorly chosen group of words to call attention to the fact that this particular kind of stupidity only exists in one group. It is the stupidity of not realizing that anyone left unidentified is assumed to be an HWM--it doesn't even make any sense to say that it can be true of other groups.

Right. Did you suddenly forget that there were quite a few other people that agreed with me: that we had all said THE EXACT SAME THING to you about how it was offensive of you to suggest that failure to quote sources was a "Conservative" trait? You were wrong there, and you're wrong here: homophobia isn't a HWM exclusive deal, not even close.

Really? So when you're playing a game online against someone, and they aren't doing as well as you, you don't think to yourself "hey--I'm more skilled at this game" but rather "I wonder if I'm skilled or if they are differently abled, possibly even invisibly so, and they are just low on spoons today"?

Out of context. I meant that I attach no significant conclusions to one-time visual observations of people.

And what was with the spoons crack?

Maybe you are the Kwisatz Haderach of Political Correctness: the one who can imagine a person in many different identities at once. The rest of us? No matter how enlightened we may be, we have to imagine people in concrete terms when we imagine a 'person'; we assign characteristics to NPCs in games to fill in the gaps that we do not know yet. That's what the poster is talking about: when we 'fill in' those gaps, we tend to fill them in with white/male/heterosexual by default. Only *if* you are an HWM can you wind up as blind to this fact as the poster was pointing out.

So you assume that everyone thinks like you do? That's incredibly strange.

Hey--maybe the poster was wrong about these people and they're not nearly as blind to it as she thinks they are. However, you're wrong to say she was making a generalization: she was making an observation. A politically incorrect one that she worded poorly--although I think she worded it like that for rhetorical effect at the expense of perfection in accuracy of expression--but an observation, not a generalization.

I call it as it lies. It looks like a generalization, I call it one.

Even if she were making a observation, she's making one from her perspective/enviornment, which certainly does not apply to many others, including myself. I see quite a different situation.

 

[scotth266]

First off, I'm going to cut part of my response and put it in PM: it's a New Day here at The Escapist since we got rid of some of our members with...issues (although could we EVER use Eggo back for a thread?) so I figure it's best to try and err on the side of being a good forum denizen.

You don't need to announce to everyone "Hey look! I am PMing a person!"

That's essentially grandstanding that you're using to make it look like you're poking holes in my argument out of the sight of the rest of the users (which you aren't.)

But I'll answer the PM anyway.

Heterosexual white male speaking here: You're missing her point, just like you missed my point in the Right Wing/Conservative/Internet Tough Guy thread.

Not to bait you, but that was locked for a reason. Likely the same reason that I pointed out.

Granting that for the sake of argument: So? Are mods incapable of making statements that would cause a thread to be locked if they were regular users? They're mods, not Suk School Doctors.

I don't get the reference.

And if a mod did make a statement like that, they probably wouldn't be a mod for much longer (as that sort of behavior tends to repeat itself.)

This is not a generalization: this is pointing out that this kind of stupidity only exists in one group.

That statement has so many holes in it I could use it to strain noodles.

I disagree.

Great. That gets us where?

But to explain what I meant: I doubt that everyone just fills in a HWM in wherever there's a blank. It's far more likely that they will fill in the blanks with characters similar to people that they have encountered.

and you're wrong here: homophobia isn't a HWM exclusive deal, not even close.

Never said it was. In fact, I'm (and I believe the OP) not even talking about homophobia: we're talking about the mistake of not realizing about "declaring that you're straight, you don't have to. It's automatically assumed that you are."

My bad on that part, I got misdirected. I still think that you're wrong though.

It's not homophobic to not realize that people assume your straight unless proven otherwise; however, until you realize that, you're in danger of not understanding why some people pushing for greater visibility of minorities are doing what they're doing.

What? I understand perfectly what they're doing. To my understanding:

"Panelists will be addressing such issues as how to provide safe spaces for LGBT people online, how to ensure the best policies are in place to prevent virtual attacks against LGBT people and how to educate the users of online communities about the effects of homophobia," GLAAD wrote.

Seems rather obvious to me.

Leaving aside the obvious (whether someone is male or female, young or old, etc): You don't conclude that a person is not suffering from lupus--a significant conclusion--based on a one-time visual observation where they are maybe just sitting quietly?

I don't really get what you're trying to say here. I'm wasn't saying that I DON'T draw obvious conclusions (such as a general age, weight, etc), just that MY obvious conclusions are quite different from what others consider to be obvious ones. Apparently all the other HWM's out there seem to deduce that a person is straight until proven otherwise, if you and Susan are correct.

And of course I don't draw the conclusion that someone suffers from lupus because they're sitting quietly in a chair: I'm not a doctor. For all I know, the person's a mute that just likes sitting down.

And what was with the spoons crack?

http://www.themedicineprogram.com/home/article/Spoon_theory



...

What's with the ...?

Forgive me for not understanding a obscure medical joke.

Even if she were making a observation, she's making one from her perspective/enviornment, which certainly does not apply to many others, including myself. I see quite a different situation.

How does that make yours right and hers a broad generalization?

I wasn't saying that my veiwpoint applies to all HWM's.

Therein lies the difference.

 

[scotth266]

The difference requires you attacking a strawman.

Waiter, check please. This is getting tiresome.

You say strawman, I say that it's a case of you phrasing things badly and me correcting you for it. But whatever. You're arguing with me over something that no longer seems to make any sort of sense.

I'm going to just get out of here, because this is diverting away from what the real point of the discussion is in the first place, the noble effort to decrease homophobia in online communities.

I don't feel like making the topic of the thread all about your attempts to refute a statement that wasn't even aimed in your direction.

 

[scotth266]

For someone who is so concerned with civil conversation here, you sure do needlessly insult people a lot.

I didn't insult you. I was being gruff, granted, but that's because the thing you've accused me of (strawmanning) is exactly what you've been doing this whole time, and I'm fed up with it.

I refuse to respond to the rest of your post either, because you insist on continuing to derail the thread in an attempt to WIN this non-existant argument that you think you are holding. I've only been sticking around in an attempt to explain what I had written, but I can quite clearly see that it isn't worth the time I've wasted because you are determined to somehow find something at fault with what I've said.

Like I said previously:

I'm going to just get out of here, because this is diverting away from what the real point of the discussion is in the first place, the noble effort to decrease homophobia in online communities.

 

[cobra_ky]

The problem is voice chat leaves no evidence. If someone calls a homosexual a derogatory name over XBL during a match there is nothing they can do about it. There is no proof. And like I said there is no way a system like that wouldn't be abused. So the solution offered is you don't have to listen to it. Here are the tools needed. Now if that was good enough then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

it's not impossible. just off the top of my head, have your xbox save the last 60 seconds or so of voice chat as audio. whenever you report someone, that audio log gets sent along with it. i have no idea if the xbox360 is capable of doing that, but that's why there needs to be dialogue with microsoft.

And to use those functions are simple. If you ever looked at another profile you would see them (well providing the user can read, some of the converations I have heard make me wonder). I think (though I am not 100% right now) even recieving a message gives you the option to "block communications" which means you would never ever recieve another message from that user (well profile, 1 could make as many profiles as they wanted to). And spending the 20 minutes making a profile to send off bad messages seems like alot of work. And if you reported it to XBL I am sure there would be a full console ban in the near future.

if these tools are so effective and easy to use, why doesn't microsoft let the GLBT community use them? why ban the words "gay" and "lesbian" on top of that?

And none of this changes the fact when she put in her profile that she was a lesbian it was a violation of the rules. If you don't like or agree with the rules that is fine. Fight them on it. Fight them the proper way. You can't just say well I don't agree so here is my middle finger MS you can sit on it and rotate til you get to my elbow then the ride is over and you have to find your own way off. And then violate the rules (no matter how right or wrong) without consequence no matter who you are or what demographic you fall into that isn't right.

I think this is where alot of people have come to misunderstand some of what I have been saying. I don't care what side you are on. It doesn't matter to me if you are gay, straight or bi. She broke the rules and it seems like everone is saying well it is ok cuz the rule is unfair. That doesn't make it ok to do what she did. If you want to be able to put I am a homosexual in your profile I don't care. If you are allowed I still don't care. Thinking it is ok to break the rules and get away with it because you are a "minority" is when I step back and ask WTF?? What happened to equality?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience

breaking bad laws is the best way to get them changed. it's how african-americans got the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_crow>Jim Crow laws overturned. it's how india eventually won independence from england.

in this case we're not even talking about laws, we're talking about a contract between an individual and a corporation, and one that hasn't even been violated. when she signed up for XBL, she agreed that if she violated microsoft's terms of use, they could suspend her. she did violate the terms and microsoft suspended her. she didn't get away with anything. she broke the rules and she got punished for it.

"what happened to equality?" things aren't equal in the first place. that's the point.

And speaking of equality if you are allowed to put your sexual preference in your profile then wouldn't the same be allowed for the anti gay group? Could they not put in thiers "homosexuality is wrong". "Homosexuals disgust me" and on and on (note that I didn't include religion or make any threats since you can say something anti gay without either therefore no breakage of the code and conduct) since they could argue being anti gay is just as much a part of them as being gay is to a homosexual? Will it not hurt since you are allowed to express yourself now. Afterall it is drilled into our heads from our churches, our traditions and most of the media that hetrosexuality is right and therefore becomes just as much as a part of us as your feelings are to you.

stated like that, i don't have a problem with statements like that as long they don't violate microsoft's other policies against hate speech or obscene speech. i just hope they realize they're baiting people into political arguments.

 

[Xanadeas]

I'm glad to know at least some companies are trying to make things a bit easier for the homosexual gaming community. From my brief skimming of this thread a number of people seem to be under the impression that we (homosexuals) want some sort of special treatment. That's not quite it... I just want to be able to mention that I'm gay if I want to and not have to be worried about verbal abuse for it. My usual method of informing people of my "status" as a homosexual is to include it in my profile(s). It's in almost all of them scattered about the internet.

 

[squid5580]

The problem is voice chat leaves no evidence. If someone calls a homosexual a derogatory name over XBL during a match there is nothing they can do about it. There is no proof. And like I said there is no way a system like that wouldn't be abused. So the solution offered is you don't have to listen to it. Here are the tools needed. Now if that was good enough then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

it's not impossible. just off the top of my head, have your xbox save the last 60 seconds or so of voice chat as audio. whenever you report someone, that audio log gets sent along with it. i have no idea if the xbox360 is capable of doing that, but that's why there needs to be dialogue with microsoft.

And to use those functions are simple. If you ever looked at another profile you would see them (well providing the user can read, some of the converations I have heard make me wonder). I think (though I am not 100% right now) even recieving a message gives you the option to "block communications" which means you would never ever recieve another message from that user (well profile, 1 could make as many profiles as they wanted to). And spending the 20 minutes making a profile to send off bad messages seems like alot of work. And if you reported it to XBL I am sure there would be a full console ban in the near future.

if these tools are so effective and easy to use, why doesn't microsoft let the GLBT community use them? why ban the words "gay" and "lesbian" on top of that?

MS isn't stopping them. These tools aren't specifically designed for the GBLT so I guess there is your problem. I can't think of any other reason that people wouldn't use them or why they are ineffective except people don't use them. Which makes them ineffective.

And none of this changes the fact when she put in her profile that she was a lesbian it was a violation of the rules. If you don't like or agree with the rules that is fine. Fight them on it. Fight them the proper way. You can't just say well I don't agree so here is my middle finger MS you can sit on it and rotate til you get to my elbow then the ride is over and you have to find your own way off. And then violate the rules (no matter how right or wrong) without consequence no matter who you are or what demographic you fall into that isn't right.

I think this is where alot of people have come to misunderstand some of what I have been saying. I don't care what side you are on. It doesn't matter to me if you are gay, straight or bi. She broke the rules and it seems like everone is saying well it is ok cuz the rule is unfair. That doesn't make it ok to do what she did. If you want to be able to put I am a homosexual in your profile I don't care. If you are allowed I still don't care. Thinking it is ok to break the rules and get away with it because you are a "minority" is when I step back and ask WTF?? What happened to equality?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience

breaking bad laws is the best way to get them changed. it's how african-americans got the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_crow>Jim Crow laws overturned. it's how india eventually won independence from england.

It wasn't just one person doing it. They formed a movement. They tried other means.

in this case we're not even talking about laws, we're talking about a contract between an individual and a corporation, and one that hasn't even been violated. when she signed up for XBL, she agreed that if she violated microsoft's terms of use, they could suspend her. she did violate the terms and microsoft suspended her. she didn't get away with anything. she broke the rules and she got punished for it.

Just like if you broke the rules here on the Escapist. You signed the contract. You gotta play by thier rules.

"what happened to equality?" things aren't equal in the first place. that's the point.

Not completely. Although you aren't exactly oppressed either. If you think about it other than the whole marriage deal (which is slowly getting changed) the only other time you face discrimination is when you don't play by the rules set in place. You may not like or agree with "don't ask, don't tell" but when you decide that it is a stupid rule and I don't have to listen well you face the consequences. As for the oppression you may face walking down the street it does happen to more than just your group. If you get 2 or 3 people together who are the same that gives them power. Then when they see someone who they percieve to be different there is a chance they will attack. That is sorry to say human nature.

And speaking of equality if you are allowed to put your sexual preference in your profile then wouldn't the same be allowed for the anti gay group? Could they not put in thiers "homosexuality is wrong". "Homosexuals disgust me" and on and on (note that I didn't include religion or make any threats since you can say something anti gay without either therefore no breakage of the code and conduct) since they could argue being anti gay is just as much a part of them as being gay is to a homosexual? Will it not hurt since you are allowed to express yourself now. Afterall it is drilled into our heads from our churches, our traditions and most of the media that hetrosexuality is right and therefore becomes just as much as a part of us as your feelings are to you.

stated like that, i don't have a problem with statements like that as long they don't violate microsoft's other policies against hate speech or obscene speech. i just hope they realize they're baiting people into political arguments.

Which is what MS was trying to avoid in the first place for the benefit of the WHOLE COMMUNITY. Although we can't have that because you need to tell everyone no matter what the situation. Or is it because they aren't catering to your special interests that cause the problem?