Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

No Same Sex Marriage In World of Warcraft?

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the i-can't-say-anything-because-i-can't-say-anything-nice dept.

Role Playing (Games) 820

Previously, we discussed a World of Warcraft guild representative getting reprimanded for mentioning same-sex relationships while advertising their organization. The subject hasn't been dropped in the intervening days, with GamePolitics providing an update to the community's reaction. Additionally, a Cathode Tan post links to a supposed discussion with a GM that kind of wrecks their whole equal treatment statement. From that post: "[GM] Anyone can report and we will take appropriate action. While it may seem ok because they are truly a heterosexual couple in real life, in game they are two females. Please keep in mind, you need to worry about the other players. While I do understand where you are coming from, there are those who do not have the maturity"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Seem kind of odd that they would do that... (5, Funny)

b4k3d b34nz (900066) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638055)

...queer, even.

Sorry Zonk (1)

CmdrTaco (troll) (578383) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638117)

It's really too bad for you. You can't find a gay lover in real life because you are such a loser. Now you can't even have a fantasy gay marriage. Looks like it's time for a shotgun mouthwash for you Zonk. I'd say it's sad, but it really isn't.

Re:Sorry Zonk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638320)

Interesting. You know, there are heterosexual couples in the game too. I guess they are losers as well. I mean, you'd have to be fair about it. The church is just being an idiot. They are the "gateway to god" and decide what should be perceived as good. I say screw the middle man.

Re:Sorry Zonk (5, Funny)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638357)

I say screw the middle man.

So... You're saying 3-way marriage should be okay too, then?

Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (5, Interesting)

MoxCamel (20484) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638059)

Say what you want about it being Blizzard's game and they can set the rules blah blah, but they damn well better set the rules for everyone. This notion that some of their players aren't mature enough to be tolerant is bunk.

Obplug for my friend's blog, but I think she says it best: [ambernight.org]

"...having spent a little time in World of Warcraft myself, I would have to agree that a large number of WoW players really are poop-flingers who can't even spell tolerance, let alone practice it. But if I were one of the few non-gold-farming players left in WoW, I think I would be insulted by [Blizzards] response, no matter how I felt about GLBT guilds. And what about the Christian WoW guilds? Will Blizzard shut them down too?"

Mox

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (5, Insightful)

Krach42 (227798) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638080)

In other news, homosexual marriages in the United States are not legal, because "while you may be ok with it, some other people in the world, might not have your maturity level."

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (4, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638172)

Actually, homosexual marriages in the US are not legal because it's a back-door way (pardon the pun) to get in on all that sweet graft of economic and legal incentives which were intended to keep the parents of children together.

The hypocracy here is that men and women who are incapable of producing their own biological offspring are still allowed to get married, even though they are no different (procreatively speaking) from gay couples.

Being a libertarian, of course, I'm all for dropping all those freebies (and slashing everybody's taxes to make up for it) and then letting anybody marry anybody or anything they choose... but alas, libertarian nut-jobs like me never get elected to anything.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

Dogers (446369) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638238)

Being a libertarian, of course, I'm all for dropping all those freebies (and slashing everybody's taxes to make up for it) and then letting anybody marry anybody or anything they choose... but alas, libertarian nut-jobs like me never get elected to anything.

Hey, I'd vote for you! Those sound like some good policies to me :)

nullification (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638286)

The government shouldn't be in the marriage business.

Nullify them all.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638311)

hmm Sounds good. There are these THREE Korean girls I met recently and wouldn't mind shacking up with all three of 'em. :-)

Yes it is true a Slashdot reader can get girls, hot girls too...

Nominal libertarian (1)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638318)

Do you really think it's possible to implement the wide, sweeping reforms the LP proposes without completely destabilizing and possibly destroying the economy? And, moreover, since rich people are taxed much more than poor, don't you think it would wildly shift the distribution of wealth into the richest hands immediately and do an excellent job of destroying the middle class?

(Posting sans karma bonus because this is entirely off-topic)

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (2, Insightful)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638335)

"Being a libertarian, of course, I'm all for dropping all those freebies (and slashing everybody's taxes to make up for it) and then letting anybody marry anybody or anything they choose..."

Not so fast! I've made my platform on the fact that people should not be allowed to marry earthworms!

Now on the more serious side, the real problem is that most people have no idea what they want. All they know is that they like bread and circuses* and that so long as the party(ies) in power provide that they are not inclined to change. I agree that the Libertarian way is better in many respects, but it can not happen without social change. The problem with our country is not the politicians, it is with the people. Lousy politicians and pork are the symptom, not the cause. Win the people and you will win the election. Joe Sixpack individually is a great guy, wants things to change, etc. but put 100 of them in a group and you now have the epitomy of "sheeple".

My 2c FWIW
-nB

*the bread and circuses reference is from "Take Back your Government" by RAH. A+++ reading for Poly Sci types, A reading for everyone else. On another note, glad I previewed.. anyone know why /. doesn't like underline tags?
-nB

Theyre not freebies (4, Insightful)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638351)

The laws around marrige and finances have nothing to do with what you're taking about. The reasoning behind it all is that if you are married to someeone, it is for all intents and purposes impossible for someone to accuratly track what is yours and what is your partners. Therefore there needs to be provisions for that, in the income tax act, in the housing act, etc etc.

The reason you can move your deductions onto your partners return and vice-versa, to get the tax breaks, is because even if there was no law allowing it **you could do it anyway**, because they would never be able to prove whose actual deduction it was in the first place, since you likely have joint accounts etc etc.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638354)

Well, marriage is supposed to be an institution, primarily designed to help raise children in a healthy environment.

Are there couples out there who, despite being married, violate its very purpose? Yes.

Does that make marriage worthless and defeat its purpose? Nope, because there is still a significant percentage of folks to whom it still has value and who raise children in such environments.

Gay and lesbian marriages largely ignore this, and concentrate only on the first. Exceptions don't make rules. Anybody marrying anything does not exactly speak well of us as a people or as a civilization.

Slippery Slope... (5, Funny)

Doggan (945328) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638140)

This is as I warned! First you allow interracial marriage- Humans and gnomes, dwarves and tauren. Disgusting! Now these same groups want to take a step further. Two troll males as fathers?!? This is unnatural! They cannot have children. This is not the way it is supposed to be. They should not be allowed to adopt either. Can you imagine the poor child with two Tauren daddies? Or two undead mommies? Inconceivable!

The next thing you know, these same groups will be preaching polygamy. Kalimdor cannot support this! It is a slippery slope!

**disclaimer** /please don't take these comments seriously ;p

Dude, they got a business to run (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638153)

And, like it or not, 60-70% of the American public is against gay marriage being on the same footing or legally the same thing as heterosexual marriage.

If allowing gay marriage in their game pisses off more people than it pleases, it'd be a bad business decision.

The "Why" of what their game-playing population doesn't matter to them.

Re:Dude, they got a business to run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638241)

You're an idiot.

This is one of the only places that small-minded bigots can actually kill the people who piss them off.

Re:Dude, they got a business to run (4, Insightful)

Rei (128717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638336)

And I can just imagine, 45 years ago:

"And, like it or not, 60-70% of the South Carolina public is against negroes being in the same movie theaters as whites. If allowing negroes in the theaters pisses off more people than it pleases, it'd be a bad business decision. The "Why" of what their movie-watching population doesn't matter to them."

It would undoubtedly go on to argue that imposing restrictions that prevent the majority from being offended (separate theaters) is perfectly reasonable, and that the black patrons can still watch movies and have a good time.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638156)

"This notion that some of their players aren't mature enough to be tolerant is bunk. "

Yes, all those *tolerant* 12-year-olds. /snicker

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

Brackney (257949) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638166)

There's been some really nice anti-semitism in Ogrimmar's general chat and trade channels on my server as well.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638278)

There's been some really nice anti-semitism in Ogrimmar's general chat and trade channels on my server as well.

Judging by how they are handling this issue, they will ban anybody who expresses their tendancy towards Judaism, in order to prevent immature reactions from being provoked in the general population.

Or maybe they won't ban them. Maybe they will relocate all those characters to a camp or two in the Kharanos. The gnomes have a good train system they can use for shipping them in large groups, if packed in tight enough, while there, those with crafting skills can be put to use, while the others can be taught mining. It's the perfect "final" solution to all those troublemakers, ja?

"Jewish" (1)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638359)

I was shocked to discover that people in non-urban areas appear to use the word "Jewish" as a general-purpose pejorative. Someone from rural Washington once said something like "fuck that, I don't care about Louisiana and their stupid jewish hurricane." Being from New York, I suppose I'll never be able to relate.

Yeah Right! (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638225)

This notion that some of their players aren't mature enough to be tolerant is bunk.

Bull! Heard in Barrens Chat:

chuck norris will round kick some tolerence into you!

Vin Diesel could cut teh tolorence on this server with his erect nipples!

YOUR MOM!

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (5, Informative)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638230)

And what about the Christian WoW guilds? Will Blizzard shut them down too?

Straw man. Blizzard has already said that gay-friendly guilds are fine - it's the advertisement in-game of guilds based around RL controversies like sexual orientation, religion, nationality, etc., that is not. They've also said that if guilds wish to recruit based specifically on these qualities (and can do it without disparaging those of differing qualities), they are welcome to use the official guild recruiting forum on their website (an out-of-game resource) to do so.

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

SquisherX (864160) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638253)

Say what you want about it being Blizzard's game and they can set the rules blah blah, but they damn well better set the rules for everyone. This notion that some of their players aren't mature enough to be tolerant is bunk.
Well it really isnt bunk. For the same reason why I cant refer to my female dog or type that im going to have a brittish slang ciggarette. Sure you can use these words in proper context without any derogatory context, but you and I know better. Just being the devils advocate here

Re:Blizzard's got some house-cleaning to do (1)

dh003i (203189) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638308)

They have the right to set whatever policies they want, whether nice or not, whether discriminatory or not. Since it's their private property, they should have the right to say no characters can have names that start with S, or no reference to homosexuality, or have different standards for homosexual and heterosexual references to couples. Whoever doesn't like it can play another game online, using someone else's property, with policies more to your liking. As private property owners, they have the natural right to set whatever policies they want, whether you or anyone else perceive them to be fair. As a free person, and self-owner, you have the natural right to tell them to go to hell.

This says it all: (3, Insightful)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638079)

"[Sylveri] So we suffer because of their lack of maturity"

Yes. That's almost always the case. Because other people are too sensitive and might get their feelings hurt by seeing/hearing things they object to, it's in Blizzard's best interest to put a muzzle on things that are potentially offensive or would cause other problems ("LOL FAGS").

It's an interesting variation on being politically correct, but that's really all it is.

Re:This says it all: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638138)

See also: Muslims and Danish political cartoons, and the mother of all "chilling effects" on news media.

Re:This says it all: (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638186)

Pff, the Muslims deserve to be ignored about their outrage until they call out their leaders for their open denigration of the Jewish faith. Until then, they are all hypocrites, every last one of them.

Re:This says it all: (1)

Scarblac (122480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638145)

Because other people are too sensitive and might get their feelings hurt by seeing/hearing things they object to, it's in Blizzard's best interest to put a muzzle on things that are potentially offensive or would cause other problems ("LOL FAGS").

I don't agree, because:
- Discriminating against homosexuals is offensive in itself, it's not reasonable to be offensive in order to prevent being potentially offensive
- There is an infinite amount of things that people are potentially offended by. Not least of which, killing things for xp. But they single out this issue.

Re:This says it all: (1)

undeadly (941339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638227)

- Discriminating against homosexuals is offensive in itself, it's not reasonable to be offensive in order to prevent being potentially offensive

It's not only offensive, it's also illegal, at least in Europe.

Re:This says it all: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638275)

But it's not really about what's offensive, because that's subjective.

It's about who and how many are offended.

Re:This says it all: (4, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638252)

In some parts of the world, anti-gay propaganda is frowned upon.
In some parts of the world, pro-gay propaganda is frowned upon.

The only way to satisfy people globally, is banning such kind of talk -- in a game, it is TOTALLY out-of-character anyway. Thus, while somewhat limitting the freedom of speech, it bans only topics that are not appropiate to the topic of the game. If you want to discuss outside things, nothing can prevent you from using any outside forum.

I used to be a high-ranking but sub-admin coder on a MUD. We enforced PG13 rules (no swearing, etc), and, while allowing OOC talk in general, we stopped (first by a verbal warning, then another one on the record, then a ban from global comm channels, and in egregious cases with a removal of the character) some topics that are grossly out-of-place. Such topics included talks about someone's sexual exploits, racial and sexual harassment, and yeah, pro-gay and anti-gay propaganda.
You are free to talk about any topic you want, but you are not free to talk about them everywhere. On private property (like a game), the game admins have the right to remove you for not complying with the rules.

They *are* allowed to recruit... (-1, Troll)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638088)

Just not in the game in the General chat channel. They were welcomed to recruit via the Forums.

People defend "GLBT-friendly" - would they defend "Aryan-friendly" or "pedo-friendly" as much as they do "GLBT-friendly?"

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (4, Insightful)

FinestLittleSpace (719663) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638121)

What the hell? You're comparing kiddy fiddlers and biggots to people who happen to find members of the same sex attractive?

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638177)

As a victim of sexual abuse, yes.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (2, Insightful)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638180)

That's a very "intolerant" view there... They do something you don't agree with.

Bigots have the "right" to dislike you. What they don't have the right to do is infringe on your rights in expressing their views.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (-1, Troll)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638347)

Yeah. Both are promoting sexual attraction to a wrong target.

Letting John marry Bob because "he loves him" and not letting M. Jackson love one of his kids even though "they love each other" means an inequality within the law. If you allow homosexual marriages, you are obliged to allow:
* zoophilia
* necrophilia
* group marriages (including ones with under-age kids (Utah!))
* kill-and-eat-me relations

This is a slippery path on which I wouldn't want to tread. Making concensual sex legal is fine _as long_ as it doesn't give one extra rights: the right to adopt children, marry and receive tax exemptions. Otherwise, I demand a tax refund for the time I lived together with several male friends: we didn't have sex with each other, but you can't discriminate against platonic relationships, can you? If the rights you are promoting would be applied, we could have made a fake group marriage :p

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (5, Insightful)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638134)

People defend "GLBT-friendly" - would they defend "Aryan-friendly" or "pedo-friendly" as much as they do "GLBT-friendly?"

No, and for good reason. The groups you mention both advocate the hurting others. Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation, while "pedo's" prey on children. GLBT would just like to do their thing without being attacked for it. Huge difference.

A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?"

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

Suppafly (179830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638171)

A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?

and the answer to that is Yes. There are several Christian guilds and they are quite public about it.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638201)

Aryans promote a viewpoint that you don't agree with. If we're talking about tolerance, you should be just as tolerant of an Aryan group's right to exist as much as a GLBT group.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638202)

A more apt analogy would be, "would a 'Christian-friendly' guild be tolerated that actively recruited Christians?"
...and that's different from the other examples....how?

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

xiphoris (839465) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638216)

Aryans advocate violence against others based on skin tone or religious affiliation

I'm Aryan, you insensitive clod! We don't advocate hurting anyone.

It's a sad state when the mere celebration of one's race, if not a minority, is automatically interpreted by others as racism. People who play the race card so frequently, I think, are the true racists.

"White pride" doesn't have to mean "down with blacks" any more than "Muslim pride" means "bomb America". Please don't generalize like this. It perpetuates the racism you might aim to solve.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638219)

oh yeah, Christians never advocate hurting others [wikipedia.org] .

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

incom (570967) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638260)

Aryans are a people, not a racist organization, and they certainly don't wholesale advocate violence, as a people. WTF are you on? Also, on the reverse, there are certainly incidences of the GLBT community advocating violence, a simple google search will yeild many thousands of results.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (5, Insightful)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638149)

I wouldn't defend their views and I wouldn't compare them .
However I would support their right to hold their views , so long as they are not forcing their views on others , such as racial intimidation , or grooming children .

The difference between GLBT , Aryan Nations and Pedophiles is simple.
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender .
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638229)

"I wouldn't defend their views and I wouldn't compare them .
However I would support their right to hold their views , so long as they are not forcing their views on others , such as racial intimidation , or grooming children .

The difference between GLBT , Aryan Nations and Pedophiles is simple.
There is no problem with being Gay or Trans-gender .
The other two however are a menace to society who prey on children or try to oppress other people for the way they are born."

I will agree with this if you will agree that there are people in this world that do not agree with you. There are people who believe that GLBT groups are just as dangerous as pedophiles, that they "prey on children", and that they try to influence others to 'be like them' and view them as a "menace to society".

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (4, Insightful)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638297)

Those people are wrong and base this on the fear of the unknown or propaganda .
I perfectly accept those views , but GLBT people are just people who either happen to fall in love with those of the same gender , or are people who were unfortunately born into the wrong gender due to some fluke of biology(in the case of the Trans-gender folks) .

The Aryan Nations however espouse violence and hatred , pedophiles whilst not all active are fixated on sexual desire which can never be legal and is very hurtful.

People who look down upon the Pedophiles or the Aryan nations are basing this on solid evidence , as opposed to views on homosexuality which are based on very little.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

gcw1 (914577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638329)

There are people who believe that GLBT groups are just as dangerous as pedophiles, that they "prey on children", and that they try to influence others to 'be like them' and view them as a "menace to society".

These people are typically narrowminded and don't understand anything about what they fear... these people also are the ones influencing others to fear/hate. As far as i'm concerned it's people like this who are a "menace to society".

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

ChrisDolan (24101) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638218)

Pedophilia is a crime. Gassing people you don't like is a crime. Being gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered is not a crime.

Your comparison of GLBT-friendly people to pedophilia-friendly people and aryan-friendly people is despicable.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (5, Insightful)

Zondar (32904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638291)

Let's get a little more exact here.

Being attracted to children is not a crime. Acting on it is in some countries.
Believing yourself to be superior to others is not a crime. Hurting others in an attempt to express that view or make that view a reality is a crime in some countries.
Being attracted to the same sex is not a crime. Acting on it is in some countries.

Be careful what labels you use. I'm only trying to point out the fact that it is a person's ACTIONS, not their BELIEFS or FEELINGS that are the issue here. However, there are people out there who will attempt to persecute you for your beliefs if they do not agree with them. The belief could be racial superiority, sexual attraction, spiritual, etc.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

titzandkunt (623280) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638340)


"...Pedophilia is a crime..."

No it isn't. Pedophilia, or in commonwealth English, paedophilia, is the condition of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent children.

If the attraction isn't acted upon, then where's the crime? People who indulge in sex acts with prepubescent children are child molesters, not merely pedophiles.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

Empty Yo (828138) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638221)

I hope you understand the difference between these, but apparently you don't. What homosexuals do is not illegal and they consent to enter into the relationship. Hate crimes and pedophilia are illegal and have victims who do not consent to be targeted for the behaviour.

Re:They *are* allowed to recruit... (1)

titzandkunt (623280) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638223)


"...People defend "GLBT-friendly" - would they defend "Aryan-friendly" or "pedo-friendly" as much as they do "GLBT-friendly?..."

Christ, are you really that stupid, or just trying to be controversial for it's own sake. "Trolling", even, as the kids call it these days...

GLBT, for all its PC horror is inclusive: Anyone who decides they are G, L, B or T can self-identify (PC alert again!) and join up.

An "Aryan-friendly" group is by definition exclusive and due to the misdemeanours of certain fans of the Aryan ideal it's still considered distasteful. "Pedo-friendly"? Something to do with feet? If it was "Paedo-friendly", some mob who were aroused by pre-pubescent children, I can't say I'd be a fan, but its a sight better than "Child-molester-friendly". The media can't make the distinction that Paedophile != child molester, but we're not that dumb. Are we? Eh? Ohhh shiiiit...

It's a GAME!!! (4, Insightful)

GReaToaK_2000 (217386) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638096)

What next?
He's playing a Female character... That's not right!!!
She's playing a Male Orc...

It's a freaking Game. A ROLE playing game. This is insane...

I can't believe this made it onto /.

Re:It's a GAME!!! (4, Funny)

Mayhem178 (920970) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638198)

No kidding! 99% of the time, when I'm playing any kind of game, I'll choose to play a female character. After all, why would I want to spend all those countless hours of gaming staring at a guy's ass as I'm running around killing things?

Bestiality, on the other hand... (5, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638102)

> While it may seem ok because they are truly a heterosexual couple in real life, in game they are two females.

As opposed to human females performing unspeakable acts with male gnomes, which is just fine. Date outside your species, just get the sex right.

Reminds me of the old "Finding Nemo" joke.

"Why are the fundies so mad about Finding Nemo?"
"Because Ellen Degeneres is in it!"
"She's a talking blue fish!"
"Yeah, but she's a lesbian talking blue fish!"

Maturity (4, Insightful)

umbrellasd (876984) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638104)

While I do understand where you are coming from, there are those who do not have the maturity.
And there are children with two male parents. I bet they have the maturity to handle it.

No one would be raising a ruckus... (1)

LeddRokkenstud (945664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638109)

if it was two Tauren males trying to get married.

I wonder if I would get a similar note. (1)

IAAP (937607) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638116)

FTFA: "While we appreciate and understand your point of view, we do feel that the advertisement of a 'GLBT friendly' guild is very likely to result in harassment for players that may not have existed otherwise."

If I had a club for RWWCHM (Right Wing White Christian Homophobic Males)?

If the issue is "Mature" (2, Interesting)

MichaelMarch (686675) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638120)

Then perhaps a Mature server should be setup to set these kind of topic to rest, not sure how they could regulate that kind of scenario but then again.. that's not my job! And please give me a break, don't tell me there is a single teen out there that doesn't know about same sex couples.

Re:If the issue is "Mature" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638169)

Considering some college students that I met that didn't know how sex even worked, I would not be surprised in this day and age of ultra-religious right.

Re:If the issue is "Mature" (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638207)

The problem then is how do you control who is and isn't on a "mature" server? It's like trying to make sure only people who RP are on RP servers. Virtually impossible to regulate.

the "how can this be abused the worst" axiom (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638128)

THe problem with this is that if they say they are truly equal to letting groups for guilds who'se tolerances may offend the moral/religious/whatever beliefs of another group is that by allowing it you allow fun like :

A white christian centric group who is "white pride" friendly.

I think Blizzard is trying to play the middle of the road by saying none of any of the potentially offensive topics as guild themes rather than need to play morality police with which are and arent offensive and to who.

Well.. (2, Insightful)

Visceral Monkey (583103) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638129)

It's a game. And more importantly, a business. They will do whatever they need to to keep maximum profitabiliy.

Re:Well.. (5, Interesting)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638273)

It's a game. And more importantly, a business. They will do whatever they need to to keep maximum profitabiliy.

Right, and by letting everyone know about what shit Blizzard is doing they will become less profitable. OMFG capitalism might just work!

It's just a damn game!!! Re:Well.. (1)

SuperBug (200913) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638289)

But it's a damn *game*! WTF is wrong with anyone that they have to take things so seriously as to be oppressing others from the way someone plays a damn game!?

Why all the drama and politics in a.....*GAME*???

Regardless of your beliefs, and business practices, and stuff, it's still a damn game!!!

Geez, is it next going to be that people who make vids like Red and Blue or the Splinter Cell's Bob and Jim or whatever that one is, aren't going to be allowed because of something like this?

It's a damn GAME!!! Get off the serious wagon, and be upset that someone wants to enforce how a game is played based on un-expressed public discomfort over the fact. If no one had said anything at all, would this even be a big deal?

I'll bet not much of one if any.

Re:Well.. (1)

maraist (68387) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638342)

It's a game. And more importantly, a business. They will do whatever they need to to keep maximum profitabiliy.

No, its a role playing game. And what they are talking about is censorship of role playing themes. When a GM disallows a popular theme in a fantasy genre, you find yourself another GM.

What's next? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638132)

First, you wanna marry your life partner.
Next, you wanna marry the gold you've farmed.
After that, you'll be bitching that Blizzard is not allowing you to have sexual relations with your gold, despite the fact that you've legally married it. Also, why the hell is Blizzard not allowing gold/player hybrid children? They are very narrow minded.

You people need to shut up and just play the game, not make it a goddamn progressive liberal struggle. You want to change the world? Don't start with a stupid GAME - write your politicians to legalize gay marriage, start petitions, attend rallies and be more proactive in real life. This is only a game.

Re:What's next? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638209)

First, you wanna marry your life partner.
Next, you wanna marry the gold you've farmed.
After that, you'll be bitching that Blizzard is not allowing you to have sexual relations with your gold, despite the fact that you've legally married it. Also, why the hell is Blizzard not allowing gold/player hybrid children? They are very narrow minded.


I can't tell if this post is really idiotic or an on-the-nose satire.

Where's Mr. Bungle and Dr. Jest when you need them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638141)

I think it's time to break out the scheissheim...

In related news (1, Offtopic)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638151)

a tauren going by the moniker admiral ackbar protested a guild whose website featured caricatures of the prophet mohammad. he threatened to use his flamestrike scroll to call down a pillar of fire, burning all infidels within the area for 58 to 74 fire damage and an addition 48 damage over 8 sec unless the offending caricature of the prophet mohammad, as a mad bomber, was removed (oh, the irony)

in all seriousness folks, that online life should mirror real life, in terms of some of the more inflammatory and intractable issues we face in the real world in our time, should be expected

don't expect an easy resolution to this, and don't expect issues like this to be any less controversial online. as real life goes, so will online life toe the line. online life is no escape from offline ideology, however maddening, silly, or serious you take any given controversy

Re:In related news (1)

19061969 (939279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638294)

"...online life should mirror real life..."

Absolutely! Why bother playing an MMPORG to escape from real life when you can, erm, live, erm real life online? :P

Sanctity (5, Funny)

The_Rippa (181699) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638154)

You know this will ruin the sanctity of online marriage.

Maybe they should create a monster named Santorum that will unleash a frothy mixure of lube and fecal matter upon the players that choose to have a gay marriage

Our Lord And Saviour, Level 40 Troll Wizard (2, Funny)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638233)

In land where devils, monsters, the undead, orcs, taurens, and countless other abominations against christianity roam free I demand biblical literalism now! I may be an undead warloc who delved too deeply into the roots of demonic power and was consumed by a lust for dark knowledge fed by The Burning Legion but I demand sanctity! Think of the children!

Re:Sanctity (1)

strider3700 (109874) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638331)

Well I learned something new. Something I really didn't want to know but something new.

There is one simple fair solution (2, Insightful)

IgLou (732042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638161)

Ban marriage in the game. Tell me it's not easy to accomplish. Nothing can be as fair as that! Why does a MMORPG need marriage anyways??

Re:There is one simple fair solution (4, Informative)

Suppafly (179830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638204)

WoW doesn't have marriage in the first place.. People have mock weddings but there isn't really an ingame way to get married and have the software recognize it. A wedding in WoW is just a bunch of characters standing around in a church just like in every other mmo.

Re:There is one simple fair solution (1)

IgLou (732042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638236)

Are you kidding me?? But... then... how...
So a bunch of people stand around and say "We're getting married" everyone nods and goes along with it and no change takes place in the game. What is there to ban then?? Better yet how could they ban it??
This makes me want to split my own head open with a dull axe.

Re:There is one simple fair solution (0, Redundant)

Suppafly (179830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638267)

"We're getting married" everyone nods and goes along with it and no change takes place in the game. What is there to ban then?? Better yet how could they ban it??

Exactly.

And How About Marriage Of EarthlingsTo Martians? (0, Troll)

cannuck (859025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638163)

And How About Marriage Of EarthlingsTo Martians?

This game must be administered by a citizen(s) of the Unites States Of America. What a bunch of either of:

a) relgious zealots/nutcases

b) immature intellectually impoverished children

c) money grubbers.

Am I the only one... (-1, Troll)

garrett714 (841216) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638164)

...who thinks that getting married in a video game is fucking weird enough, let alone same sex marriages? WoW, what has this world come to? Give it some time, and people will be requesting to marry their pet / minion / whatever screaming "IT'S MY RIGHT DAMNIT!"

different worlds (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638183)

Uhm, why don't they just create a world where people are okay same sex relationships? And a separate world for the bigots?

That guild was discriminating based on orientation (0, Flamebait)

Jamesday (794888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638199)

"OZ is recruiting all levels | We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)"

Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild.

Seems clearly contrary to a policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As it should be, for discriminating on that basis is simply wrong. Whichever way that discrimination is going. People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation.

Re:That guild was discriminating based on orientat (1)

JTorres176 (842422) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638261)

You lost me. You mean if you create something in order to keep people from being harrassed by other people, you're discriminating against the people who would be harrassing them by not allowing them in the guild?

I've heard of putting a spin on something, but that statement puts a tornado on it.

Cats and Dogs Living Together (5, Funny)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638200)

Hey, it's all 1's and 0's in WoW. And you can't have 1's consorting with other 1's while 0's consort with other 0's. Why if that happened the first time a big, nasty XOR came along everything would become nothing, and then where would you be?

Mawwiage is what bwings us togevah today.... (1)

JTorres176 (842422) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638205)

Okay, being besides the point that the meat of this article has nothing to do with gay marriage, MMORPG marriage, or anything else, however states a snippet about an unrelated incident having to do with gay marriage, we'll move on to the valid point of the article...

Now, someone may have to clarify this for me, but basically, due to their anti-harrassment policy, you're not allowed to be against GLBT (Gays, Lesbians, Bis and Trans?) however it is also against the harrassment policy to support GLBT?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't?

Re:Mawwiage is what bwings us togevah today.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638274)

None of this would be a problem if we sent them all to concentration camps, now would it?

Re:Mawwiage is what bwings us togevah today.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638355)

None of this would be a problem if we sent them all to concentration camps, now would it?

You're absolutely right. No clue why it wasn't clear to me before. Anyone caught harrassing gays, lesbians, bis, or trannies should be sent to concentration camps. Thanks for clearing that up! Don't know why that hasn't been suggested before.

"Harassment for players"?!? (4, Insightful)

The Angry Mick (632931) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638239)

From TFA:

"we do feel that the advertisement of a 'GLBT friendly' guild is very likely to result in harassment for players that may not have existed otherwise"

So punish the harassers . Blizzard should sprout a pair and teach that intolerance will not be tolerated.

The PC Thing to do (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638242)

The Politically Correct thing to do is allow this behavior on a couple of servers only for starters, and increase the number of servers if these become over crowded.

I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine what those server names should be.

Re:The PC Thing to do (1)

xerph (229015) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638301)

This has nothing to do with political correctness. Blizzard is a business and as such has a responsibility to maximize profits for its shareholders, not play PC police.

If disallowing that sort of group placates more people than it displeases and helps keep a steady stream of revenue coming in, then that's the choice they need to make.

Re:The PC Thing to do (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638363)

f disallowing that sort of group placates more people than it displeases and helps keep a steady stream of revenue coming in, then that's the choice they need to make.

And if finding a home for both points of view keeps all players happy, it would be a great move on their part.

Gay marriage happens all the time in WoW (5, Funny)

Kawolski (939414) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638296)

It's just that the grooms involved don't know it...yet.

What do you mean you're only "ROLE-PLAYING" a female character?!

Google (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638312)

Google has been offline now for several minutes. Anyone else notice this?

Star Wars Galaxies (1)

Leeesher (831509) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638328)

SWG has allowed same-sex and inter-species marriage from the beginning - This was especially useful when males playing female characters wanted to marry their real-life girlfriends in-game. :)

Why... (1)

consoneo (442007) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638333)

Why is it such a big f****** deal? Marriage - in the real world it's a sharing of posessions and religion / life. Ok, good deal.

In a game, it's a novelty. If you're married, you're probably playing in the same dang room together! How imporant is it really? And especially if it's a female and a female. World of Warcraft is a game created by Blizzard. If the same sex marriage takes away from the world they envisioned, then it is not meant to be. It is their choice, and it is their call. If it is so very imporant to the players that they be married, just chose a different race? How hard is it? They might even be able to request a "sex change" in from a GM if being married is so important.

Let's get something straight here (1, Interesting)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638339)

GLBT marriage = BAD! Someone sending Blizzard monthly payments might get offended and quit sending money, or someone might hurt the feelings of the GLBT player who was open enough to come out of the virtual closet and they might quit sending Blizzard money (or sue them in England).

Interspecies marriage = ???

I would just allow any guild theme (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14638346)

and those that are offended can choose to not participate them, or fuck off, which ever is easier. Why do certain people feel this need to tell others how to act and what they find acceptable should be willed upon everyone else.

FFXI has simalar rules (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14638348)

ffxi also bans same sex marrage... so its not exactly a new trend in mmo games
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?