Religion and Politics in Video Games

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30125
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by YellowKing »

Judging people from a moral high horse smacks too closely to me to judging people from a religious high horse.
User avatar
EvilHomer3k
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7918
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:45 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by EvilHomer3k »

Blackhawk wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 1:44 pm Keep their opinions to themselves? No. Keep their accusations to themselves? Yeah. And some of the arguments made (via links in this thread and others) have amounted to, "This thing is bad, and if you don't boycott it like I do, you're a bad person."
It took me a while to digest all the stuff I've read. I can certainly see how you come to the conclusion that "if you don't boycott it like I do, you're a bad person."
I don't think that was said outright. What was said outright is that if you don't boycott this game I don't consider you an ally to the LGBTQ+ community.

I don't think boycotting something determines if you are good/bad. Everyone has their own causes and you don't have to join my in my cause just because we are friends let alone post on the same forum (even though this forum is a bit more close-knit than most). I won't be playing the game because someone I respect feels strongly about it. I'm not donating to their cause. I have my own that I feel strongly about. I only posted the link I did because if someone doesn't know what a horrible person JKR is they probably should. After that it's up to them to decide. Before this controversy came up I honestly didn't know much about JKR and now I do. My goal isn't to bully anyone or make them feel like they aren't doing enough. No one here should feel I'm judging them or think less of them because they play this game because I don't. Well, except people who are complaining about the ref calls in the SB. I'm judging them. :horse:
That sound of the spoon scraping over the can ribbing as you corral the last ravioli or two is the signal that a great treat is coming. It's the washboard solo in God's own
bluegrass band of comfort food. - LawBeefaroni
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43488
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Blackhawk »

And that's fair, and an understandable position.

It's my personal position that not boycotting a video game isn't nearly enough of a determining factor to call someone 'not an ally' any more than boycotting one would make someone an ally. It's too big and too complex of an issue for that sort of thing to be a deciding factor. Especially since most boycotts, at the end of the day, are token gestures, not meaningful acts.

And FWIW, it wasn't in reference to anything anyone here said, just to the extreme hostile stance some of those articles took.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by malchior »

EvilHomer3k wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:44 pmIt took me a while to digest all the stuff I've read. I can certainly see how you come to the conclusion that "if you don't boycott it like I do, you're a bad person."
I don't think that was said outright. What was said outright is that if you don't boycott this game I don't consider you an ally to the LGBTQ+ community.
Which is pretty unfair. Loud shouting on the internet is not a good basis of evaluating how "good" anyone supports a group of people who are fairly diverse in opinion on this issue themselves.

I'll say it again I don't agree with her stance on pretty much anything about this issue but I think she is being vilified for what people feel about what she said versus what she actually said. The idea her audience has a hologram of her in their mind is probably accurate.

To that end here is an alternative take. The NY Times has been taking a beating on this issue lately with the trans activist letter the other day as a broadside against them. And now they are a magnet for the shoutiest activists right now. To be fair, those folks have some valid points but in my opinion it tends to get lost in the righteousness.

Anyway, the NY Times then decided to 'double down' themselves with this opinion piece which argues something along the path I take on this. If you can read the full piece, it's something to think about.
Now, in rare and wide-ranging interviews for the podcast series “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling,” which begins next week, Rowling is sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says in one of the interviews. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”

This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous as it is absurd. The brutal stabbing of Salman Rushdie last summer is a forceful reminder of what can happen when writers are demonized. And in Rowling’s case, the characterization of her as a transphobe doesn’t square with her actual views.

So why would anyone accuse her of transphobia? Surely, Rowling must have played some part, you might think.

The answer is straightforward: Because she has asserted the right to spaces for biological women only, such as domestic abuse shelters and sex-segregated prisons. Because she has insisted that when it comes to determining a person’s legal gender status, self-declared gender identity is insufficient. Because she has expressed skepticism about phrases like “people who menstruate” in reference to biological women. Because she has defended herself and, far more important, supported others, including detransitioners and feminist scholars, who have come under attack from trans activists. And because she followed on Twitter and praised some of the work of Magdalen Berns, a lesbian feminist who had made incendiary comments about transgender people.

You might disagree — perhaps strongly — with Rowling’s views and actions here. You may believe that the prevalence of violence against transgender people means that airing any views contrary to those of vocal trans activists will aggravate animus toward a vulnerable population.

But nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic. She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

malchior wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 8:24 pm She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.
Except, of course, to exist in her spaces. She denies them basic womanhood and tells them to go pee with the men, where transgender people are far more likely to be harmed. I don't disagree with many of her stances - it certainly seems reasonable to keep trans people who have committed violent crimes against women out of women's prisons. However, Rowling extends this to pretty much all female spaces including restrooms.
“When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman — and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones — then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.
And she has been casting a whole lot of doubt on whether trans people should be able to access medical care to transition.
Every time she starts talking about trans issues, Rowling seems to resurface another damaging and debunked misconception. She has claimed, erroneously, that youths who transition often “grow out of their dysphoria” and regret their decision — an attitude that is, right now, guiding Republicans as they restrict access to gender-affirming care for minors. She has speculated that hormone therapy is just “a new kind of conversion therapy for young gay people.” In that sense, beliefs like Rowling’s are dangerous — particularly when they’re peddled by a figure with her level of reach and influence.
This handwaving away of her feelings about trans women is just wrong. She certainly seems to believe that they are not women, as do many of the people she has lavishly praised. IMO, when you lavishly tweet your support for someone who says this:
“I believe that it is impossible to change sex or to lose your sex. Girls grow up to be women. Boys grow up to be men. No change of clothes or hairstyle, no plastic surgery, no accident or illness, no course of hormones, no force of will or social conditioning, no declaration can turn a female person into a male, or a male person into a female.”
you are denying the very core of trans people. From my perspective, there is no way to support that view and not be hostile to folks who are trans.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by malchior »

gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 7:38 am
malchior wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 8:24 pm She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.
Except, of course, to exist in her spaces. She denies them basic womanhood and tells them to go pee with the men, where transgender people are far more likely to be harmed. I don't disagree with many of her stances - it certainly seems reasonable to keep trans people who have committed violent crimes against women out of women's prisons. However, Rowling extends this to pretty much all female spaces including restrooms.
I think this gets far too binary. I'm not going to defend her on this but I'll explain how I interpret her positions (as we seem to understand them) a little differently. She has made some arguments here seem to hinge on the self-identification aspect. Essentially if you allow people to just declare themselves anything then there are no limits. It has sounded to me from her comments that she would have no problem with people who've been 'confirmed trans' to use those bathrooms. There are obviously problems with that but the idea she doesn't support them 'existing' isn't true. She doesn't however agree with the most liberal interpretation. That's different IMO. As an aside, I think self-identification is the least mainstream idea in trans activism. I have no problem with it personally but it often appears to be the stickiest issue.

There is also a fairly good argument that her path is mean and pretty unworkable where public bathrooms come to mind. What are trans folks supposed to do? Carry a card? It is however workable in some governmental situations such as imprisonment where medical support could provide a basis for decision making. Though I'll point out I disagree with her take on the Scotland prison issue. My hot take is that where the controversy arises take the sex and gender out of some of it and instead take a risk based approach. Is that person known to be a risk to any other group of people? If yes, then design controls to protect that group.
“I believe that it is impossible to change sex or to lose your sex. Girls grow up to be women. Boys grow up to be men. No change of clothes or hairstyle, no plastic surgery, no accident or illness, no course of hormones, no force of will or social conditioning, no declaration can turn a female person into a male, or a male person into a female.”
you are denying the very core of trans people. From my perspective, there is no way to support that view and not be hostile to folks who are trans.
This is the heart of the disagreement. A definitional difference between sex and gender identity. She seemingly supports the idea that biological sex exists and has relevance. Which is fairly hard to argue against existence since at least for now, you can't change a person's genetic makeup to obliterate or create a Y chromosome. There are obviously all sorts of exceptions and variation but the idea that sex doesn't exist is pretty far out of mainstream.

There is definitely an issue where she doesn't ignore the blurry lines of what gender identity is in relation to sex. However, I don't think that this is in exclusion to trans people. To my knowledge supported gender affirming therapies, surgeries, etc. That doesn't sound anti-trans or transphobic to me.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Jaymann »

malchior wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 12:54 pm
gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 7:38 am
malchior wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 8:24 pm She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.
Except, of course, to exist in her spaces. She denies them basic womanhood and tells them to go pee with the men, where transgender people are far more likely to be harmed. I don't disagree with many of her stances - it certainly seems reasonable to keep trans people who have committed violent crimes against women out of women's prisons. However, Rowling extends this to pretty much all female spaces including restrooms.
I think this gets far too binary. I'm not going to defend her on this but I'll explain how I interpret her positions (as we seem to understand them) a little differently. She has made some arguments here seem to hinge on the self-identification aspect. Essentially if you allow people to just declare themselves anything then there are no limits.
I think this is the crux of the issue. People should be able to declare any sexuality they want. What is the difference between someone identified as male putting on a dress and one who has their genitalia surgically altered, gets breast implants, gets cosmetic surgery and injects female hormones? Who makes the distinction and where do they draw the line?
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43488
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Blackhawk »

Jaymann wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 2:14 pm I think this is the crux of the issue. People should be able to declare any sexuality they want. What is the difference between someone identified as male putting on a dress and one who has their genitalia surgically altered, gets breast implants, gets cosmetic surgery and injects female hormones? Who makes the distinction and where do they draw the line?
That's easy.

We don't know.

Or more specifically, we're still figuring it out. It's a deep, fundamental change to our society, and working out the details of how it needs to work will take time and communication, and will face hurdles (such as some refusing to communicate.) It will take time for society to adapt. Deciding that the answer is either 100% A or 100% B on day one and that anyone who doesn't conform to one of those isn't communication. It isn't figuring it out. It isn't allowing society to adapt.

And yeah, that sucks if you're fully supporting of one side, and even more so if you're the people needing change. But we can't just flick the switch and expect hundreds of millions of people to fall into line behind the new idea at once, and then treat those who don't as if they were militant extremists.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

malchior wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 12:54 pm Essentially if you allow people to just declare themselves anything then there are no limits. It has sounded to me from her comments that she would have no problem with people who've been 'confirmed trans' to use those bathrooms. There are obviously problems with that but the idea she doesn't support them 'existing' isn't true. She doesn't however agree with the most liberal interpretation. That's different IMO. As an aside, I think self-identification is the least mainstream idea in trans activism. I have no problem with it personally but it often appears to be the stickiest issue.
It's sort of an odd concept to me. How does one *not* self identify as a gender? As far as I know there is no governmental organization that will certify "this person is a trans female but this other person isn't serious enough about it yet".
malchior wrote: This is the heart of the disagreement. A definitional difference between sex and gender identity. She seemingly supports the idea that biological sex exists and has relevance. Which is fairly hard to argue against existence since at least for now, you can't change a person's genetic makeup to obliterate or create a Y chromosome. There are obviously all sorts of exceptions and variation but the idea that sex doesn't exist is pretty far out of mainstream.

There is definitely an issue where she doesn't ignore the blurry lines of what gender identity is in relation to sex. However, I don't think that this is in exclusion to trans people. To my knowledge supported gender affirming therapies, surgeries, etc. That doesn't sound anti-trans or transphobic to me.
In the quote I posted above she compared hormone therapy to anti-gay conversion therapy, so I'm not sure I would say that she is supporting gender affirming medical treatments. We can obviously disagree and that's fine, but it seems to me that if you believe that sex = gender and it is an immutable property that then saying you support trans people is innately contradictory.
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

Blackhawk wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 2:49 pm

And yeah, that sucks if you're fully supporting of one side, and even more so if you're the people needing change. But we can't just flick the switch and expect hundreds of millions of people to fall into line behind the new idea at once, and then treat those who don't as if they were militant extremists.
Is it wrong to treat people as militant extremists when they are passing laws to outlaw needed medical treatment? Passing laws that make it a felony for doctors to aid underage patients? Passing laws to force school districts to use birth gender pronouns and dead names? Hell, Oklahoma wants to make it a felony for doctors to provide gender affirming care to adults. Sorry, but fuck those people.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43488
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Blackhawk »

gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:51 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 2:49 pm

And yeah, that sucks if you're fully supporting of one side, and even more so if you're the people needing change. But we can't just flick the switch and expect hundreds of millions of people to fall into line behind the new idea at once, and then treat those who don't as if they were militant extremists.
Is it wrong to treat people as militant extremists when they are passing laws to outlaw needed medical treatment? Passing laws that make it a felony for doctors to aid underage patients? Passing laws to force school districts to use birth gender pronouns and dead names? Hell, Oklahoma wants to make it a felony for doctors to provide gender affirming care to adults. Sorry, but fuck those people.
I'm not talking about people who are actively working against trans people. I'm talking about someone who makes an uninformed comment, or who complains about the wrong thing, and is then treated the same as the true hatemongers. I'm talking about who is behind 95% of the changes suggested, but is hesitant about one thing on the list being treated like an enemy. I'm talking about people who need time to adjust and are being damned for not converting completely the second the fingers are snapped.

Unfortunately, many people have decided on a black-and-white, wit-us-or-agin-us, no room for compromise, no discussion approach. You toe the line or you're the bad guy. And that, I think, is a problem.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Max Peck »

Why are people arguing about Atomic Heart?
Atomic Heart was a bolt from the blue when its first trailer dropped in 2018, showcasing a shining Soviet retrofuture FPS that seemed like it was learning all the right lessons from BioShock, Stalker, and the Metro series. Never mind that it was the debut game from a new developer—a Russian studio called Mundfish—it was laser-targeted at a category of players who devoured immersive sims and ambitious-but-flawed works of genius from East European studios alike. It very quickly became an object of internet obsession, a game we were intrigued by but knew very little about.

But a lot has happened since then. In February last year, Russia invaded Ukraine, starting a war that has killed thousands on both sides and sparked one of the biggest refugee crises in modern history, with millions of Ukrainians fleeing abroad to escape the war at home. Russia became an overnight pariah in the west, excised from fundamental mechanisms in the international banking system, deserted by some of the biggest corporations in the world—including several gaming titans—and censured in the UN.

In the wake of that invasion, Atomic Heart's Russian provenance became more than an interesting detail of the game's development. As many kinds of Russian art found itself subject to intense scrutiny and swift bans, rumours began to swirl about Mundfish's investors and excited fans feared their purchase would somehow end up funding a brutal war. Even though Mundfish says it's based in Cyprus, gamers are still arguing about whether it's okay to buy Atomic Heart.
In the opaque bramble of our global economy, we're all put in the difficult position to buy stuff that may be financially entangled with people, causes, or governments that, say, commit unspeakable atrocities. If we buy Hogwarts Legacy, are we indirectly supporting JK Rowling's transphobic comments? If we buy Call of Duty, are we endorsing Activision Blizzard's harmful labour practices? And if we buy Atomic Heart, are we, through some winding, invisible scheme, backing Russia's war against Ukraine?

We all have to make that decision ourselves. Personally I think the frustration felt by Ukrainians whose homes are being destroyed with Mundfish's vague, equivocal statements is entirely understandable. But I don't think there's enough concrete evidence to condemn the studio as a whole as 'pro-war' or anything like it. I suspect Mundfish, like millions of Russians, had the rug pulled out from under it by the start of a war it didn't ask for, and its moves since have been a clumsy attempt to navigate uncharted and choppy waters.

If you're interested in grappling more with this tough moral question, someone basically made four seasons of a TV show about it: The Good Place, a philosophical 2016 comedy basically about how it's impossible to get into heaven because modern society is unavoidably complicated.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Victoria Raverna »

gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:51 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 2:49 pm

And yeah, that sucks if you're fully supporting of one side, and even more so if you're the people needing change. But we can't just flick the switch and expect hundreds of millions of people to fall into line behind the new idea at once, and then treat those who don't as if they were militant extremists.
Is it wrong to treat people as militant extremists when they are passing laws to outlaw needed medical treatment? Passing laws that make it a felony for doctors to aid underage patients? Passing laws to force school districts to use birth gender pronouns and dead names? Hell, Oklahoma wants to make it a felony for doctors to provide gender affirming care to adults. Sorry, but fuck those people.
Rowling is passing laws?
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Max Peck »

There are state-level politicians in the USA that are doing that, but I haven't seen anything one way or the other to indicate if Rowling spoke out to support those initiatives (to be fair, I haven't gone looking either). She did vocally oppose the Scottish bill that would make the process of transitioning less onerous, which does make her that much shittier, but isn't as bad as supporting the American measures.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:41 pm In the quote I posted above she compared hormone therapy to anti-gay conversion therapy, so I'm not sure I would say that she is supporting gender affirming medical treatments. We can obviously disagree and that's fine, but it seems to me that if you believe that sex = gender and it is an immutable property that then saying you support trans people is innately contradictory.
Considering that Rowling posted an extensive essay describing, in her own words, her positions on these issues, I’m not sure why we’re still debating things like whether she supports gender affirming medical treatments:
I want to be very clear here: I know transition will be a solution for some gender dysphoric people, although I’m also aware through extensive research that studies have consistently shown that between 60-90% of gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoriahas .
She does. It’s not open for debate. She supports gender affirming medical treatment as a solution for some trans people.
Last edited by Kurth on Sun Feb 19, 2023 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Max Peck »

Technically, in that quote she doesn't say she supports it, she simply acknowledges that it's a solution for those that don't "grow out of it." There's a clear implication that she doesn't support it for people under some arbitrary age, before which they may still "grow out of it."
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 3:00 pm Technically, in that quote she doesn't say she supports it, she simply acknowledges that it's a solution for those that don't "grow out of it." There's a clear implication that she doesn't support it for people under some arbitrary age, before which they may still "grow out of it."
As to the first part, it’s a reach to say that she’s not supporting transition when she says it’s “a solution.”

As to the second part, the implication that she’s concerned about young people making permanent decisions about their sexuality at a time when they’re potentially still in flux, I think that’s an accurate reading of her position.

I may disagree on that position. From my perspective, it’s a really, really complicated question. I don’t know what the answer is. But I don’t feel like people that are voicing these concerns - and there are a lot of them - are simply transphobic bigots worthy of cancellation.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Max Peck »

If someone meets her arbitrary requirement for transition as a "solution" will she accept that person as a woman (assuming that we're discussing transwomen, which seems to be Rowling's primary concern)?
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 7:04 am
gbasden wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:51 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 2:49 pm

And yeah, that sucks if you're fully supporting of one side, and even more so if you're the people needing change. But we can't just flick the switch and expect hundreds of millions of people to fall into line behind the new idea at once, and then treat those who don't as if they were militant extremists.
Is it wrong to treat people as militant extremists when they are passing laws to outlaw needed medical treatment? Passing laws that make it a felony for doctors to aid underage patients? Passing laws to force school districts to use birth gender pronouns and dead names? Hell, Oklahoma wants to make it a felony for doctors to provide gender affirming care to adults. Sorry, but fuck those people.
Rowling is passing laws?
When I was responding to Blackhawk, I wasn't talking about Rowling. We were having a larger discussion around trans acceptance and the huge number of anti-gay and anti-trans bills that are being passed in parts of the U.S.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:00 pm If someone meets her arbitrary requirement for transition as a "solution" will she accept that person as a woman (assuming that we're discussing transwomen, which seems to be Rowling's primary concern)?
Hmm, I'm not sure how to take that post, so I'll just ask you: Do you feel there should be no guidelines/rules/requirements before a minor receives potentially permanent gender affirming treatment?
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Max Peck »

Kurth wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 6:42 pm
Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:00 pm If someone meets her arbitrary requirement for transition as a "solution" will she accept that person as a woman (assuming that we're discussing transwomen, which seems to be Rowling's primary concern)?
Hmm, I'm not sure how to take that post, so I'll just ask you: Do you feel there should be no guidelines/rules/requirements before a minor receives potentially permanent gender affirming treatment?
Nice deflection, but I specifically asked about someone who met Rowling's criteria, which presumably means the person is an adult. Personally, in the case of a minor I think the parents and doctors involved with the individual are better positioned to provide informed guidance than myself or a random billionaire on Twitter.

However, you dodged the actual question. If Rowling accepts that gender transition is the correct "solution" -- for an adult, if we want to avoid the issue of whether it is appropriate for a minor -- then does she accept that transwomen are women? If so, where does she unequivocably state that? If not, then she comes off with at least a whiff of the transphobic about her. Would I "cancel" her for it? No, but the idea that she can be "cancelled" is laughable in the first place. She's a billionaire who is literally laughing all the way to the bank no matter what people say about her. She's going to be just fine no matter what mean things people say about her on Twitter (or Mastodon or whatever). In fact, from quickly scanning her Twitter posts, she seems to enjoy punching down at random people who say unpleasant things about her. If it doesn't seem to bother her, why would it bother me?
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

Kurth wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 6:42 pm
Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:00 pm If someone meets her arbitrary requirement for transition as a "solution" will she accept that person as a woman (assuming that we're discussing transwomen, which seems to be Rowling's primary concern)?
Hmm, I'm not sure how to take that post, so I'll just ask you: Do you feel there should be no guidelines/rules/requirements before a minor receives potentially permanent gender affirming treatment?
To me, that is a conversation between the minor, their parents and their doctor. The first step for most children is puberty blockers which is entirely reversable.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 7:16 pm
Kurth wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 6:42 pm
Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:00 pm If someone meets her arbitrary requirement for transition as a "solution" will she accept that person as a woman (assuming that we're discussing transwomen, which seems to be Rowling's primary concern)?
Hmm, I'm not sure how to take that post, so I'll just ask you: Do you feel there should be no guidelines/rules/requirements before a minor receives potentially permanent gender affirming treatment?
Nice deflection, but I specifically asked about someone who met Rowling's criteria, which presumably means the person is an adult. Personally, in the case of a minor I think the parents and doctors involved with the individual are better positioned to provide informed guidance than myself or a random billionaire on Twitter.

However, you dodged the actual question. If Rowling accepts that gender transition is the correct "solution" -- for an adult, if we want to avoid the issue of whether it is appropriate for a minor -- then does she accept that transwomen are women? If so, where does she unequivocably state that? If not, then she comes off with at least a whiff of the transphobic about her. Would I "cancel" her for it? No, but the idea that she can be "cancelled" is laughable in the first place. She's a billionaire who is literally laughing all the way to the bank no matter what people say about her. She's going to be just fine no matter what mean things people say about her on Twitter (or Mastodon or whatever). In fact, from quickly scanning her Twitter posts, she seems to enjoy punching down at random people who say unpleasant things about her. If it doesn't seem to bother her, why would it bother me?
Not a deflection. It just struck me that you’re putting a lot of emphasis on the notion that Rowling was making “arbitrary” requirements which made me wonder whether you thought there should be any requirements.

As to your question about whether Rowling would accept someone who transitioned as a woman:
Again and again I’ve been told to ‘just meet some trans people.’ I have: in addition to a few younger people, who were all adorable, I happen to know a self-described transsexual woman who’s older than I am and wonderful. Although she’s open about her past as a gay man, I’ve always found it hard to think of her as anything other than a woman, and I believe (and certainly hope) she’s completely happy to have transitioned. Being older, though, she went through a long and rigorous process of evaluation, psychotherapy and staged transformation. The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass.
Are we still whiffing the transphobic here?

Also, have you read her essay? I’m assuming that anyone who is offering an opinion on this has actually read what Rowling has said and not just the characterizations of what she’s said.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by gbasden »

Kurth wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 8:01 pm

Also, have you read her essay? I’m assuming that anyone who is offering an opinion on this has actually read what Rowling has said and not just the characterizations of what she’s said.
I've absolutely read her essay. It's consistent in the idea that trans women are not actual women and that they are absolutely not welcome in women's spaces.
I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces.
I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class. The hundreds of emails I’ve received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive.
Her entire philosophy seems to be consumed with the idea that there are innumerable men who will want to put on a dress to enter women's spaces and assault them. I do not believe that the evidence shows this as true.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

gbasden wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 8:34 pm Her entire philosophy seems to be consumed with the idea that there are innumerable men who will want to put on a dress to enter women's spaces and assault them. I do not believe that the evidence shows this as true.
I think that’s an entirely fair critique. Based on her writings, I think it’s also tied into her personal experiences being a victim of abuse by men. Understandable maybe, but not a good foundation for a policy rationale re trans issues.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Zarathud »

When JK Rowling writes “I deny your movement and will fight against you” and “I have free speech to oppose your beliefs”, there’s no misunderstanding. She’s not “failing to be an ally.”

She decided this is a fight she wanted to participate in, and chose to make a Last Stand on the F’ing Ridge. When you fight in the wars, you’re going to get hurt. And so will other people.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by malchior »

Not everyone wants to be an ally as others define it. Especially when it is be an ally or be screamed at and threatened with death. It's sad that people can't tolerate disagreement anymore.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

Zarathud wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 10:31 pm When JK Rowling writes “I deny your movement and will fight against you” and “I have free speech to oppose your beliefs”, there’s no misunderstanding. She’s not “failing to be an ally.”

She decided this is a fight she wanted to participate in, and chose to make a Last Stand on the F’ing Ridge. When you fight in the wars, you’re going to get hurt. And so will other people.
I think it would really help to link to the source when you are quoting someone and the source of the quote isn’t apparent.

Were those quotes in her essay? Because if so, I missed them. So I’m assuming they’re from sone tweet or something. I haven’t read them all. A helpful pointer in the right direction would be appreciated.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Zarathud »

Cited above
Speaking as a biological woman, a lot of people in positions of power really need to grow a pair (which is doubtless literally possible, according to the kind of people who argue that clownfish prove humans aren’t a dimorphic species).

So why am I doing this? Why speak up? Why not quietly do my research and keep my head down?

Well, I’ve got five reasons for being worried about the new trans activism, and deciding I need to speak up.
But endlessly unpleasant as its constant targeting of me has been, I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces. Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Victoria Raverna »

Seem reasonable to me. Against "the new trans activism" doesn't mean she is against trans.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:15 am Seem reasonable to me. Against "the new trans activism" doesn't mean she is against trans.
Yep.

And it’s not a good idea to put things in quotes that aren’t, you know, actual quotes.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Zarathud »

Let me sum up. Telling activists you don’t like THEM is like slapping someone with a glove, then being surprised they want to duel you to the death.

What I quoted is basically what she said to the activists. She’s a writer and all the rest is a poor attempt at nuance.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by GreenGoo »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 7:04 am Rowling is passing laws?
Could be. How would we know? But probably not.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by GreenGoo »

Max Peck wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 7:16 pm No, but the idea that she can be "cancelled" is laughable in the first place. She's a billionaire who is literally laughing all the way to the bank no matter what people say about her. She's going to be just fine no matter what mean things people say about her on Twitter (or Mastodon or whatever). In fact, from quickly scanning her Twitter posts, she seems to enjoy punching down at random people who say unpleasant things about her. If it doesn't seem to bother her, why would it bother me?
:wub:
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by GreenGoo »

malchior wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 11:14 pm It's sad that people can't tolerate disagreement anymore.
Absolutely.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43488
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Blackhawk »

I love disagreement. This forum shifts my views all the time (usually after I've vehemently argued my old views.)
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by GreenGoo »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:15 am Seem reasonable to me. Against "the new trans activism" doesn't mean she is against trans.
I can't speak to what is reasonable to you. I can say that for me, the derision practically seeps from her words.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by GreenGoo »

Blackhawk wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 11:58 am I love disagreement. This forum shifts my views all the time (usually after I've vehemently argued my old views.)
Me too.

The problem is that people like JK Rowling have a larger than reasonable voice, and that angry protestors are claimed to be more or less representative of the movement as a whole, depending on the movement.

Black Lives Don't Matter because looters exist, for example.

I think the forum does quite well discussing disagreement.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by Kurth »

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 12:00 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 11:58 am I love disagreement. This forum shifts my views all the time (usually after I've vehemently argued my old views.)
Me too.

The problem is that people like JK Rowling have a larger than reasonable voice, and that angry protestors are claimed to be more or less representative of the movement as a whole, depending on the movement.

Black Lives Don't Matter because looters exist, for example.

I think the forum does quite well discussing disagreement.
Not sure how you measure what’s a “larger than reasonable voice,” but setting that aside, here’s my problem with all of this: To an overwhelming degree, JK Rowling has used her platform to advocate on behalf of vulnerable groups. She’s not some evil “billionaire” with inherited wealth from a privileged background.

But because in the eyes of a certain subset of activists, she stepped out of line on trans issues, she’s now the face of hate.

It’s stupid. It’s dishonest. It’s nowhere near proportional. And it’s counterproductive.

As an aside, I agree that the forum does quite well on discussing disagreement. It’s one of the main reasons I’ve stuck around so long!
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30125
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Religion and Politics in Video Games

Post by YellowKing »

I always felt very conflicted about the Rowling controversy because the books always seemed to promote inclusivity, which didn't jibe with her purported stances.

I'm glad this discussion came to light, because it very much clarified what was actually said vs what was filtered through the angry mob.

I still don't agree with some of her stances, and she obviously did a terrible PR job with the whole situation, but at least I no longer feel like some sort of criminal for being a Harry Potter fan.
Post Reply