Jump to content


Photo

Blah blah off topic Chrysta argument blah


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
11 replies to this topic

#1 Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Modder
  • 2450 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 12:52 AM

NOTE FROM SIR K: This has been split off from the main Chrysta FAQ thread as it is a totally off-topic argument that does not belong there. I am also not a great fan of using a private forum for airing of controversial issues like this where open and fair debate is often impossible, since peoples' views are almost always entrenched and based as much on emotional investment and "gut feeling" as on any objective fact or reasoned opinion. However, I am not going to delete the posts summarily since that isn't my style of moderation, and neither am I going to lock this thread unless anyone starts being personally offensive... Having said that though, I would rather people did NOT continue this argument here. 'Nuff said.

Now back to Kulyok's post, which was in itself a perfectly reasonable response to this post by Azzathoth in the FAQ thread (I wanted to point that out in case people thought I was pointing the finger at Kulyok for being responsible for the ensuing discussion/argument. I am not - this was just the most sensible point to break the topic off):


Lesbian romances may break PG-13 standard for the simple reason that while children below 13 know of man-woman relationships, they do not know of the same gender relationships. I imagine that goes differently in different countries, but, speaking for myself, I did not know of same gender relationships until the age of 14, and I would prefer not to allow 13- children under my care to play games with homosexual elements, simply because they do not yet know of such things.

Edited by Sir Kalthorine, 11 January 2006 - 04:55 AM.


#2 Kaeloree

Kaeloree

    Head Molder

  • Administrator
  • 9200 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 12:57 AM

We all have our opinions on these matters-- lets not get into an argument here. This thread is about... okay, no, go ahead. The title is just as bad as the argument. ;)

#3 Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Modder
  • 2450 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 01:03 AM

In this case, Azzathoth presumed to imagine my thoughts on the matter and to put words in my mouth, which is, I believe, unacceptable. Otherwise I would not have responded.

Edited by Kulyok, 18 December 2005 - 01:03 AM.


#4 Jyzabyl

Jyzabyl

    Order of the Radiantly Radiant

  • Member
  • 1468 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 02:56 AM

If we're not in the business of putting words into peoples mouths may I suggest you don't make general statements about what 13 year olds know and don't know. As the mother of a 13 year old I can state for a fact that she is aware of same gender romances. She may not choose to play one and as a responsible parent I have some say over what she can play. You have a right to your beliefs and to make choices appropriate for you, please stop trying to enforce your choices and beliefs on others.
True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing. And in knowing that you know nothing, that makes you the smartest of all. Socrates

Not only are female redheads frequently lovely but theirs is a loveliness that suggests both lust and danger, pleasure and violence, and is, therefore, to the male of the species virtually irresistible. Red O red were the tresses of the original femme fatale. Tom Robbins

The way to a man's heart is through his stomach. Unless you know anthing about anatomy. In that case the way to a man's heart is through his ribs with a meat cleaver. Miss Jyzzy's Guide to Men.

Xtreme Versatility? Xpress Yourself!

#5 Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Modder
  • 2450 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 03:21 AM

And I stated that I believe it goes differently in different countries/etc, and presented my own example. I fail to see how it can be viewed as a general statement, or enforcing my beliefs on others.

Incidentally, if you point out a movie which features homosexual elements and is rated PG-13, I'll be very interested.

#6 Jyzabyl

Jyzabyl

    Order of the Radiantly Radiant

  • Member
  • 1468 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 03:40 AM

In my country we have a different rating system. The ratings are based on sexual content, not the genders of the people engaging in the sexual acts. There is a debate on the morality of homosexuality elsewhere. The point of my post is that different people have different standards and the right to make their own decisions based on their own standards. Modders have the right to produce mods with their choice of content. Players have the right to choose which mods they play. If you disapprove of a Mods content don't play it. Please stop trying to impose your standards on others.
True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing. And in knowing that you know nothing, that makes you the smartest of all. Socrates

Not only are female redheads frequently lovely but theirs is a loveliness that suggests both lust and danger, pleasure and violence, and is, therefore, to the male of the species virtually irresistible. Red O red were the tresses of the original femme fatale. Tom Robbins

The way to a man's heart is through his stomach. Unless you know anthing about anatomy. In that case the way to a man's heart is through his ribs with a meat cleaver. Miss Jyzzy's Guide to Men.

Xtreme Versatility? Xpress Yourself!

#7 Meira

Meira

    I'm the snow on your lips

  • Member
  • 411 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 03:48 AM

Incidentally, if you point out a movie which features homosexual elements and is rated PG-13, I'll be very interested.


"Philadelphia" is rated PG 13 in US, though I suppose that depends what you think as "homosexual elements" and yes, the rating is different in some countries (16 in Singapore, allowed for all in Finland).
Ihmeellinen meri

Kummalliset kalat liukuvat syvyydessä,
tuntemattomat kukat loistavat rannalla;
olen nähnyt punaista ja keltaista ja kaikki toiset värit -
mutta ihana meri on vaarallista nähdä,
se herättää tulevien seikkailujen janon:
mitä on tapahtunut sadussa, on tapahtuva minullekin.

- Edith Södergran


Amber - The BG2 NPC Mod Project Now released!
Amber's discussion forum at Gibberlings 3

#8 Azkyroth

Azkyroth
  • Modder
  • 3496 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 03:52 AM

Lesbian romances may break PG-13 standard for the simple reason that while children below 13 know of man-woman relationships, they do not know of the same gender relationships. I imagine that goes differently in different countries, but, speaking for myself, I did not know of same gender relationships until the age of 14, and I would prefer not to allow 13- children under my care to play games with homosexual elements, simply because they do not yet know of such things.


Three[EDIT](Well, it was when I started ;/ ){/EDIT] questions on this:
1) How old are you now?
2)
a) Was your upbringing typical of that of children in your culture/country at the time, and
b) How does it compare to the typical upbringing of children now?
3)
a) How much media coverage did the social and legal issues surrounding homosexuality get at the time, and
b) How much do they get now, in your culture/country?
4) What country? (For basis of comparison). I do see the "Moscow, Russia" in your location field; but you living there now doesn't necessarily mean you grew up there.

In the United States, the controversy over gay marriage alone gets so much media coverage that it is almost incredible, solely on those grounds, that a 13 year old today would not have heard of the concept of same-sex relationships. Given the public ranting and raving about the "evil" of homosexuality from various Tinfoil Hat right-wing groups, the somewhat more diplomatic but nevertheless vocal disapproval of many churches, the attempts by more moderate and liberal groups to educate young audiences about tolerance and diversity, and the routine and virtually ubiquitous use of "gay" as a generic pejorative slang adjective ("Dude, you're gay!" "Detention?! That's gay!" Think "cool" but with an opposite connotation) by schoolchildren of every age on and off the playground (it is absurd to postulate that, upon hearing it constantly, the vast majority, or any majority, of 13-and-under year olds might not think to ask their peers or parents what the word was supposed to mean), the chances of a normal American child (as opposed to one adamantly homeschooled and restricted to the home and a carefully screened group of playmates, or perhaps raised under a rock in a more literal fashion) not being familiar with the concept of same-sex relationships in this day and age are in the "snowball's chance in hell" range. The claim that children under 13 should not be exposed to concepts which they are assumed to be unfamiliar with, but of which, demonstrably, virtually none of them are ignorant, is at best fallacious. However, children 13 and under are likely to find it extremely patronizing as well--gods know I did.

Anyway, assuming that their parents do in fact care about content and ratings, what would children 13 and under be doing playing a game labeled "[T]een" in the first place? And if they're not, or shouldn't be, isn't this kind of a moot point?

In this case, Azzathoth presumed to imagine my thoughts on the matter and to put words in my mouth, which is, I believe, unacceptable. Otherwise I would not have responded.


This would be a valid complaint and I would offer an apology were it not for the unambiguously qualified nature of "I imagine" and similar statements. As such, it is a statement of a fact that I know to be true: namely, that I tentatively regard this explanation as most probable based on observation and pattern-recognition. There is nothing presumptuous about this. Unless you in fact contend that formulating tentative explanations for the causes of observed phenomena based on past experience and pattern recognition is unreasonable (and are prepared to act accordingly from this point hence), your complaint is groundless.

Also, I would contend that my inference was a valid one, at least in part. You claim that you oppose exposing children under 13 to depictions of same-sex relationships...

for the simple reason that while children below 13 know of man-woman relationships, they do not know of the same gender relationships

. Let us assume that this is true. There are a great many other things which many 13 year olds do not know about: (algebra comes to mind, along with concepts of biology and chemistry, and history, and political philosophies, and...). Would you contend that they should not be exposed to these things as well (note: by "exposed" I mean in any way; hence arguments that children at this age are not ready to be systematically taught these subjects, while they may or may not have merit, miss the point)? If not (and I infer that you do not, since an array of other evidence makes the opposite position absurd in practice), why? What is the relevant difference between depictions of same-sex relationships and many of the other things children at that age are not familiar with? I'll wait for your answer before finalizing any judgements, but at the risk of further accusations of presumptuousness, I suspect you've already answered this question:

I feel uncomfortable around lesbian romances

While there is, perhaps, not a perfect one-to-one correspondence between the position described in this statement and the concept of a subject being "controversial," there is nevertheless a clear logical connection between the two. My inference stands.

[EDIT]However:

And I stated that I believe it goes differently in different countries/etc, and presented my own example. I fail to see how it can be viewed as a general statement, or enforcing my beliefs on others.

I agree, sort of. While his/her (masculinish-by-western-conventions, feminine portrait... *blinkblinks*) argument evaluates as false, in that it is based on premises which are factually untrue, this is indeed an expression of an opinion. so far, Kulyok's statements on this point qualify as neither coercion nor badgering, and hence do not qualify as an attempt to force his/her beliefs on others (Sir K, after all, may or may not have specifically asked for input *ain't gonna scroll through all that again to verify* as well as offering answers to questions, this is hardly at the level of pressuring him to make the mod one way or another). Dissent is not inherently coercive or hostile, no matter what certain confused muppets might say about it. I think the interpretation of the comment as being intended as a general statement is valid (in the sense of following logically from what was known at the time), since Kulyok's initial statement on the issue did not include the "in my country" qualifier, but s/he has since clarified adequately, I think...

Bloody hell, this is starting to look like one of Kat's debate pieces x.x

Edited by Azzathoth, 18 December 2005 - 04:16 AM.

"Tyranny is a quiet thing at first, a prim and proper lady pursing her lips and shaking her head disapprovingly, asking, well what were you doing (wearing that dress, walking home at that hour, expressing those inappropriate thoughts) anyway? It's subtle and insidious, disguised as reasonable precautions which become more and more oppressive over time, until our lives are defined by the things we must avoid. She's easy enough to agree with, after all, she's only trying to help -- and yet she's one of the most dangerous influences we face, because if she prevails, it puts the raping, robbing, axe-wielding madmen of the world in complete control. Eventually they'll barely need to wield a thing, all they'll have to do is leer menacingly and we fall all over ourselves trying to placate them." -godlizard


#9 Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Modder
  • 2450 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 04:07 AM

Meira, thank you. It sounds like a great film to watch, and I withdraw my claim about homosexual elements normally rated over PG-13, even if this film is an exception. LINK

Azzathoth, you have said: " I imagine the issue is the "controversial" nature of same-sex relationships." Yes, that was presuming my motives, and yes, it is wrong. Being personally uncomfortable with playing lesbian romances does not mean being uncomfortable with lesbian relationships. Here I am probably supposed to say: "Hey, my best friend is a lesbian!" - no, she is not, but my favourite singer is.

Dixi. I will play Chrysta, I do not have anything against homosexual relationships, and I will not participate in this debate any further.

Edited by Kulyok, 18 December 2005 - 04:08 AM.


#10 Sir Kalthorine

Sir Kalthorine

    Order of Radiant Ugliness

  • Modder
  • 2188 posts

Posted 11 January 2006 - 04:58 AM

As stated in my note at the top of this split-off thread, I am not going to lock this thread unless things get overly personally offensive - anyone familiar with my moderating ethos knows I like to remain hands-off and non-draconian until the last possible moment. I would however kindly REQUEST that people not continue this debate any further on this private forum, if you please.

KACH_TS.jpg Chrysta... could helping her to uncover her past threaten your own future?

"Pity the land in need of Heroes."- Bertolt Brecht
"A little madness, now and then, is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#11 Azkyroth

Azkyroth
  • Modder
  • 3496 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 07:35 PM

I would however kindly REQUEST that people not continue this debate any further on this private forum, if you please.


Fair enough, though it's worth noting that the debate in question had been dormant for nearly a month at the time you posted this comment. :)

"Tyranny is a quiet thing at first, a prim and proper lady pursing her lips and shaking her head disapprovingly, asking, well what were you doing (wearing that dress, walking home at that hour, expressing those inappropriate thoughts) anyway? It's subtle and insidious, disguised as reasonable precautions which become more and more oppressive over time, until our lives are defined by the things we must avoid. She's easy enough to agree with, after all, she's only trying to help -- and yet she's one of the most dangerous influences we face, because if she prevails, it puts the raping, robbing, axe-wielding madmen of the world in complete control. Eventually they'll barely need to wield a thing, all they'll have to do is leer menacingly and we fall all over ourselves trying to placate them." -godlizard


#12 Seifer

Seifer

    The best Anti-Paladin weapon is a tin opener...!

  • Member
  • 4505 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 03:39 AM

Like your reply methinks. And with that being said lets close it off eh?

how come you always look so damn cool in every photo I see you in?!?


Speaking of modding, I listened to IER 3 yesterday, so you can have another quote for your signature: how come you sound so damn cool, as well as look it? It's unfair. Seriously.


Still a cyberjock, still hacking the matrix, still unsure of what that means.

TeamBG member - http://www.teambg.eu