Shadow Complex Prompts Difficult Questions
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am a NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB
Discrimination? Yes, that is illegal. You're allowed to be a homophobe though.harhol said:
To put it in perspective, there are legal KKK and Neo-Nazi groups in the US: they're just not allowed to do what they did back when racism was tolerated (going around beating up people and such.) They're still allowed to protest and publicize their views though.
Sorry, I was being unclear. My point was that you should judge the works of a person on their own merits, not on the maker's ideology.Alex_P said:
You mentioned that the Homeworld series contains his ideas on homosexuality, but does that automatically mean that gay people should avoid it? Some of them might find it interesting. Even if they didn't, what if they would have disliked Homeworld but loved Ender's Game? It's all a measure of what messages they disagree with. And if people are so concerned about funding the man's beliefs through purchasing his books, they could just go to their local library to try them out. Libraries could use some more people around.
As far as Shadow Complex goes, you can just play it at a friend's house to see if it contains a message that makes you uncomfortable while playing it. There's no reason to reject books and games because you dislike the creator's ideals.
To quote a well-used example, oral sex is also illegal in California.harhol said:
Freedom of Speech does mean "I may not agree with your viewpoint, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Sure the guy's a tool, but if we block anyone with a "illegal" thought from expressing their opinion, that's fascism. Also stagnation.
Because it's exactly that sort of thing that won homosexuals their rights in the first place.
And furthermore, I think removing the death penalty for being homosexual in places like Mauritania is a far more worthy endeavor than simply moaning that some famous guy says he doesn't like gays.
Enders Game WAS the only good one, just like Dune was Frank Herberts only good one. Most people only have one good science fiction book in them.Silly_Billy said:
And, like I said, I think the ideology of his works is pretty crappy for the most part.scotth266 said:
Trying to organize some kind of boycott is pretty silly, but it pays to draw attention to the fact that, yes, Orson Scott Card has some sucky opinions and actually acts on them. And he writes them into his books, too.
I don't see anything wrong with just summarizing it so that folks can decide whether they want to take the time to read it or not. It's not like it's even spoiling anything.scotth266 said:
-- Alex
Then you shouldn't buy them. As long as you judged the books on what they were by themselves, I don't mind. It's just that I object to the boycotting of books/games/whatever because you disagree with the person behind the pen: if you object to what the pen has written, well, that's your own issue.Alex_P said:
Let's say J.K Rowling wrote a excellent book in a sci-fi setting about how racism is wrong: a masterpiece analyzing modern racism in a crazy world. It would be just as wrong for Fundamentalists to boycott it because it was written by the same woman who wrote Harry Potter.
You lost me. I was merely stating that if the average consumer was afraid of supporting Mr.Card via purchase of his books, they could take them out from a library: hence allowing them to read the books without giving the man any money. If they ENJOYED the book, I'd tell them to go buy it if they could though.
So am I, by this logic, helping to spread Scientology by catching a Tom Cruise flick?
Or say...damaging the argument against global warming by buy something made in Australia?
Or...complicit with the Chinese crackdown in Tibet by buying runners "Made in China"?
Stretching the logic maybe, but surely Card is not much closer to the point of sale than the Chinese Government would be through taxes? While I applaud the sentiment and am very much in favour of gay marriage (though as an atheist I don't see what all the fuss is about), I think that , in this globalised age there is nothing that we can buy that will not put money into the hands of people whose views we disagree with. Sure even something like buying local organic food puts money into the hands of farmers that would rather rely on Government subsidies than find a way to make money, I don't agree with that, but I do agree with locally grown food to reduce our climate impact.
Is the game any good though? I mean, could this just be a bit of a publicity flash in the pan to allow controversy to cover for a games that suck round objects.
A side note: (I live in Ireland, the point about farmers refers broadly to the CAP program which eats up about a third of the EU budget each year, but most countries have similar schemes).
Or say...damaging the argument against global warming by buy something made in Australia?
Or...complicit with the Chinese crackdown in Tibet by buying runners "Made in China"?
Stretching the logic maybe, but surely Card is not much closer to the point of sale than the Chinese Government would be through taxes? While I applaud the sentiment and am very much in favour of gay marriage (though as an atheist I don't see what all the fuss is about), I think that , in this globalised age there is nothing that we can buy that will not put money into the hands of people whose views we disagree with. Sure even something like buying local organic food puts money into the hands of farmers that would rather rely on Government subsidies than find a way to make money, I don't agree with that, but I do agree with locally grown food to reduce our climate impact.
Is the game any good though? I mean, could this just be a bit of a publicity flash in the pan to allow controversy to cover for a games that suck round objects.
A side note: (I live in Ireland, the point about farmers refers broadly to the CAP program which eats up about a third of the EU budget each year, but most countries have similar schemes).
My personal rule here is that I will actively support the work of artists whose ideology I agree with; but I will passively ignore the ideology of artists whose work I otherwise enjoy.
Star Trek seems to posit a socialist future where everything is run by a democratic military government with no money or civilian industry, and anyone whose spoken to me for about 5 minutes knows that's not my view of future utopia, but it doesn't stop me from enjoying Wrath of Khan.
Star Trek seems to posit a socialist future where everything is run by a democratic military government with no money or civilian industry, and anyone whose spoken to me for about 5 minutes knows that's not my view of future utopia, but it doesn't stop me from enjoying Wrath of Khan.
Ok so let me get this straight. The gay community is trying to change him by threatening to boycott his game because of his feelings over a specific subject. Right or wrong that is his opinion and he has the freedom to express it. What I find really sad is the gay community is right in doing this but if he came out and said I refuse to sell the game to gays he would be a bad guy.
Also when did "celebrity" opinions matter so much? Who really cares if he is anti gay, a raging racist or whatever. We tend to judge these people by a little soundclip that has probably been edited and most definitely taken out of context. I think the only people who should boycott this game because of his beliefs are the ones who have sat down and had an actual conversation with him.
How did a developer get into this in the first place? Who cares what his beliefs on anything are? He is a developer not a spokesperson. Did the reporter come right out and ask him? Did he blog it? Where did the question come from to get an answer in the first place?
Also when did "celebrity" opinions matter so much? Who really cares if he is anti gay, a raging racist or whatever. We tend to judge these people by a little soundclip that has probably been edited and most definitely taken out of context. I think the only people who should boycott this game because of his beliefs are the ones who have sat down and had an actual conversation with him.
How did a developer get into this in the first place? Who cares what his beliefs on anything are? He is a developer not a spokesperson. Did the reporter come right out and ask him? Did he blog it? Where did the question come from to get an answer in the first place?
I wonder what people would say if the man was part of a lobby that was trying to get Sharia law implemented in the US? That it strikes anyone as odd, or silly for some who disagree with Card to suggest boycotting things he is involved in is what is odd.
And this is where the disconnect is. I don't care what his or anyone elses personal views are. If the game was anti gay propoganda the boycott is understandable. Since the game has nothing to do with his views on gays or gay marriage I fail to see the problem. Even if a bunch of Nazi's did make a game I wouldn't understand a boycott unless it was a death camp simulator. In fact I don't think we should know they are Nazi's to begin with unless you know them on a personal level. Not from the media who has other interests than the truth. We shouldn't know or care what political or personal views any celebrity has. They are ill informed schmucks like the rest of us. And just because we know thier names and faces doesn't make thier views or statements any more valid than yours or mine. The only difference is if I were to say "Gay marriage will doom us all" no one would give a rat's ass because I don't have a camera in my face when I say it.keptsimple said:
I also don't think the statement is as bigoted as it seems. Not when you factor in his personal religious beliefs. This is the big issue here. If your lifestyle is offensive to my religious beliefs which one of us is right? You (and I don't mean you personally) claim you were born gay. I claim I was born Mormon. Niether one of us claim to have a choice in the matter. You don't agree with my lifestyle. Doesn't that make you just as bigoted when making statements such as "the fact that he is a practicing Mormon is evidence enough of his almost vicious stupidity."
wow. who knew Orson Scott Card (or Koichi Sugiyama, for that matter) was such a dickcheese?
i guess i'm slightly less inclined to support them financially now, not that i was in the first place. not that it matters, really. i'm sure i do business with plenty of people with whom i would disagree vehemently on political issues. Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite, but i have no problem with Ford cars. The Boston Red Sox used to be notoriously racist, but they're still my favorite baseball team. My parents own stock in Fox News and they're more liberal than i am.
ultimately it's a personal decision. each of us needs to make a subjective moral judgement and decide if they're going to buy this game or not. personally i like <a href=http://gaygamer.net/2009/08/the_shadow_complex_conundrum.html>this suggestion from gaygamer.net: buy it if you want, but also donate $5 or so to a gay rights charity. you get your game, the developers get their money, but it's a net positive for civil rights.
i guess i'm slightly less inclined to support them financially now, not that i was in the first place. not that it matters, really. i'm sure i do business with plenty of people with whom i would disagree vehemently on political issues. Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite, but i have no problem with Ford cars. The Boston Red Sox used to be notoriously racist, but they're still my favorite baseball team. My parents own stock in Fox News and they're more liberal than i am.
ultimately it's a personal decision. each of us needs to make a subjective moral judgement and decide if they're going to buy this game or not. personally i like <a href=http://gaygamer.net/2009/08/the_shadow_complex_conundrum.html>this suggestion from gaygamer.net: buy it if you want, but also donate $5 or so to a gay rights charity. you get your game, the developers get their money, but it's a net positive for civil rights.