Valve pulls "Kill the Faggot" from Steam Greenlight - Polidicks

I'm gonna sum up the arguments There's a difference between a satire or tasteful game or a completely untasteful game with hate speech under the guise of being satire. Hatred = kill everyone because reasons This game = kill "faggots" because reasons GTAV = do whatever you want but you have the choice to kill everyone There is a line, it's not drawn, but there's a line, and it's obvious when it's been crossed. There's a certain percentage of people that have to say "no, this is dumb and doesn't belong ON [B]STEAM[/B]." It's consumer opposing at it's finest. So again For/against (roughly) Hatred = 50/50 This game = 5/95 GTAV =90/10

[QUOTE=_Axel;47664800]Then why pretend that hate speech against non-protected people is not actually hate speech? From what you're saying I get that it's pragmatically more sound to prioritize fight against hate speech that can yield the worst results, but that doesn't justify saying that potentially less dangerous calls to violence against people who aren't routinely oppressed isn't hate speech, when it is by definition. [editline]5th May 2015[/editline] That's like saying racism against white people doesn't exist. Sure as a whole it is less rampant than racist against other people, but that doesn't make it nonexistent.[/QUOTE] Where did you get from my post that I think hate speech against white people is impossible? Where have you seen this argument (and please don't mention Tumblr or twitter, I'm pretty sure 90% of those posts are trolls baiting you). It's entirely possible to be racist against white people, but it's really not that much of an issue in most of the western world because white people are rarely killed or denied service just for being white. It's a problem we can try to resolve once people stop blaming black people for everything wrong ever and stop trying to kill people because they are gay.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;47665018]Where did you get from my post that I think hate speech against white people is impossible? Where have you seen this argument (and please don't mention Tumblr or twitter, I'm pretty sure 90% of those posts are trolls baiting you). It's entirely possible to be racist against white people, but it's really not that much of an issue in most of the western world because white people are rarely killed or denied service just for being white. It's a problem we can try to resolve once people stop blaming black people for everything wrong ever and stop trying to kill people because they are gay.[/QUOTE] I didn't imply you thought hate speech against white people is impossible. I'm referring to all the people in this thread who said hate speech can only target oppressed minorities, which is what I'm arguing against. And I have seen people on Facepunch say that you can't be racist against white people, mainly from users who think racism and systematic racism are interchangeable. I also understand that it's more of a priority to curb racism against oppressed people than it is to discourage bigotry against more privileged persons, but prioritizing something doesn't mean we have to ignore all the other issues completely and pretend they don't exist, like people do when they say calling for violence against people who aren't 'officially protected' isn't hate speech. [editline]5th May 2015[/editline] I would also like to add that the idea that racism against white people isn't a huge issue mainly applies to western countries, but in other areas it isn't always that tame, which is something you should take into account if the topic at hand is of international scope.

I'm just curious. If a game has you explicitly and only kill white people, is that racist? Is that less racist or more racist than if it was another race?

It is still racist, but it's not the same. While I don't want to sound like I'm throwing out a double standard out there and while I have argued against reverse racism, making a video game about explicitly killing black people carries connotations that are worse than white people. There's far more violence and discrimination against the latter to this day (race riots like Baltimore) and throughout history. I would protest against any game that depicted targeted killing of any group, though.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47665744]I'm just curious. If a game has you explicitly and only kill white people, is that racist? Is that less racist or more racist than if it was another race?[/QUOTE] Depends on the context. If it makes sense that the people you are killing are only white people, then no, it's not racist. If the point of the game was killing white people because of racist reasons, then yes, it's racist. It's like when RE5 was considered racist because you killed a ton of black people, even though the game took place in Africa, where you'd obviously be killing more black people than other races. The game wasn't having you kill black people because it was racist, it was having you kill black people because it was in a place where the population is overwhelmingly black. If the game was having you kill people [I]because [/I]of the color of the skin however? That's a different story. And well, the sad truth is double standards do exist. A game solely about killing black people would be seen as "more racist" than a game solely about killing white people. Is that right? Well, no. But it's how the world is.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;47665789]It is still racist, but it's not the same. While I don't want to sound like I'm throwing out a double standard out there and while I have argued against reverse racism, making a video game about explicitly killing black people carries connotations that are worse than white people. There's far more violence and discrimination against the latter to this day (race riots like Baltimore) and throughout history.[/QUOTE] I certainly agree they have a worse history to contend with an actual racism to contend with on a daily basis. But that's still silly to me. What if a chinese game dev made that game where you only kill white people? Is it racist or not? Is it a different type of racism not worth saying anything about due to white peoples history? I'm just confused when we head into this territory. I see it as clearly racist if you use race as a basis for discrimination, doesn't matter the colour to me, but that's not the case? Hm. [editline]5th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Skyward;47665793]Depends on the context. If it makes sense that the people you are killing are only white people, then no, it's not racist. If the point of the game was killing white people because of racist reasons, then yes, it's racist. It's like when RE5 was considered racist because you killed a ton of black people, even though the game took place in Africa, where you'd obviously be killing more black people than other races. The game wasn't having you kill black people because it was racist, it was having you kill black people because it was in a place where the population is overwhelmingly black. If the game was having you kill people [I]because [/I]of the color of the skin however? That's a different story. And well, the sad truth is double standards do exist. A game solely about killing black people would be seen as "more racist" than a game solely about killing white people. Is that right? Well, no. But it's how the world is.[/QUOTE] Well that was kind of my point. That RE5 example was exactly what I was thinking about. Had all those africans been white africans, it wouldn't be considered racist by reactionaries, but it would be an ACTUAL form of racism, no? I'd rather find the truth than whatever settles reactionaries down. I don't care about them.

Well, it also depends on specific contexts as well. I could imagine a terrorist game that involves killing as many stereotypical white Americans as being incredibly offensive, but what I was trying to say is that it's a far more sensitive problem when you focus on an actually oppressed group.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;47665839]Well, it also depends on specific contexts as well. I could imagine a terrorist game that involves killing as many stereotypical white Americans as being incredibly offensive, but what I was trying to say is that it's a far more sensitive problem when you focus on an actually oppressed group.[/QUOTE] Oh I know it's more sensitive then, but is that how we should deal with things? It's a more sensitive topic, so rather than confront it we ignore it? I know we need to be tactful to deal with many issues, but is treating every minority group that exists like they're too sensitive to be represented in media forms, is that okay? I get weirded out by this concept. If i'm playing say, GTAV, and I kill people, can any of those people be black or is it racist if I do that? Should the world not be populated by only people that aren't offensive to kill? Namely just white men? Isn't that silly?

That's definitely not what I'm saying. I'm explaining that specific targeting of a specific group because of their ethnicity is the problem. I don't think we should keep treating minorities as minorities in very specific aspects because it'll forever be condescending and create it's own inequalities, however targeting a specific group will always be out of line regardless if they're minorities or not.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47665861] If i'm playing say, GTAV, and I kill people, can any of those people be black or is it racist if I do that?[/QUOTE] It is racist if you only target black people on purpose.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;47665877]That's definitely not what I'm saying. I'm explaining that specific targeting of a specific group because of their ethnicity is the problem. I don't think we should keep treating minorities as minorities in very specific aspects because it'll forever be condescending and create it's own inequalities, however targeting a specific group will always be out of line regardless if they're minorities or not.[/QUOTE] Well I don't know if I'm satisfied with that as you said [QUOTE]It is still racist, but it's not the same.[/QUOTE] so to me it seems like having white people specifically be a target is a form of racism that is so not worth talking about, we ignore it. And genuinely, I agree, white people don't face racism in real life. I just don't see why we draw the line with digital white people.

I don't feel like white people are being targeted though, which results in no significance and no problem to discuss.

I don't know, the principle of the matter of racism seems like one worth discussing and turning on it's head to better understand, but maybe that's just me.

[QUOTE=_Axel;47664673]So I guess by your own logic it's not worth it criminalizing rape done to males as well, since protecting the most harmed demographic is more important?[/QUOTE] Rape is a physical action, speech depends on contextual ideas that already exist in society. But regardless, yes, any demographic can be a victim of hate speech. Go find me a game on Steam Greenlight where straight people are this victim.

I feel like a bad person for laughing at the phrases being said by the characters in the "Worst Steam Trailers" video. "YOU WANNA CHOMP MY WEINER?!" :v:

[QUOTE=Zeke129;47666222]Rape is a physical action, speech depends on contextual ideas that already exist in society. But regardless, yes, any demographic can be a victim of hate speech. Go find me a game on Steam Greenlight where straight people are this victim.[/QUOTE] Good that you agree with the idea that hate speech can target any demographic. I don't know of any game that offers a similar depiction of straight people, but you don't have to look very deep to find games that treats a non-protected demographic the same way and don't get labelled with hate speech. Just look at the GTA V rampages I mentioned earlier, for instance the one where you slaughter rednecks: - You are given the objective of killing people from a specific demographic, namely lower-class rural Americans, just like this game specifically targets homosexual and trans people. - The NPC themselves are caricatures that propagates negative stereotypes about said demographic, like this game's announcer's phrases, 'AIDS carrier' and such. - On top of all that, country farmers aren't exactly gifted with privileges. They don't have high income nor are recognized very positively by society. This should make hate speech against those people a sensible topic if we go with the logic we mentioned earlier. And yet nobody accused Rockstar of propagating hate speech. In fact a lot of people found it pretty funny. Don't give me the 'but this is satire' excuse either, a satirical antisemitic cartoon is still antisemitic, so I don't see how this is any different. I can understand that you consider this game to be hate speech, especially given how ridiculous it is, but you should do the same with others that meet the same criteria.

Guys, chill, it was a game. Not a hate crime, please save your tears for actual injustices against the Lettuce Gay Bacon Tomaotoe community.

[QUOTE=3bwii;47670168]Guys, chill, it was a game. Not a hate crime, please save your tears for actual injustices against the Lettuce Gay Bacon Tomaotoe community.[/QUOTE] "Kill the faggot" in pretty much any other context would be obvious homophobic hate speech. Why would it suddenly get a pass if it's in video game form?

[QUOTE=MisterMooth;47670295]"Kill the faggot" in pretty much any other context would be obvious homophobic hate speech. Why would it suddenly get a pass if it's in video game form?[/QUOTE] The game was made to piss you people off, and you somehow managed to fall for it and whale into your keyboards like a13 year old girl on tumblr. It's a fucking dumb flash game that was made as a joke and was put up on greenlight more likely than not expecting to get downvoted to hell and collect some tears. Let me re-ittarate it's a fucking flash game not a fucking hate crime. Protest something less trite that maybe actually matters.

[QUOTE=3bwii;47671071]The game was made to piss you people off, and you somehow managed to fall for it and whale into your keyboards like a13 year old girl on tumblr. It's a fucking dumb flash game that was made as a joke and was put up on greenlight more likely than not expecting to get downvoted to hell and collect some tears. Let me re-ittarate it's a fucking flash game not a fucking hate crime. Protest something less trite that maybe actually matters.[/QUOTE] You're the only one who sounds pissed off here. And saying "it was MEANT to be offensive" doesn't really excuse it of anything.

[QUOTE=MisterMooth;47670295]"Kill the faggot" in pretty much any other context would be obvious homophobic hate speech. Why would it suddenly get a pass if it's in video game form?[/QUOTE] Personally I think we should always dissociate the content of a work of fiction from its author's ideology, because its meaning is heavily dependent on the viewer's interpretation, and events occurring in a fictional world doesn't reflect actual endorsement of these events from the author. For instance, in the context of being submitted to Greenlight, this game makes its developers seem like homophobic assholes, but if it was included in a bigger game as an arcade mini game (which seems to be what it's eventually going to be) then you could see it as being a criticism of the latent homophobia you can find in a few corners of the videogame industry, which is the complete opposite of what the message appears to be right now. IMO, you can't accuse a developer of perpetrating hate speech - which is a crime that is judged from an objective standpoint - through their fiction work based on the actions of fictional characters that are not necessarily endorsed by its author. Whereas someone actually calling for violence, outside of a fictional setting, can be objectively judged as such. You can still say the game is shitty, tasteless, offensive or insensitive because that's a subjective interpretation. To say that it is hate speech, however, you'd have to prove that the author and the game's message through its depiction of fictional events endorse hateful behavior, something which I'm sure English classes taught you is practically impossible, unless the author themselves admit to it.

[QUOTE=3bwii;47671071][B]The game was made to piss you people off[/B], and you somehow managed to fall for it and whale into your keyboards like a13 year old girl on tumblr. It's a fucking dumb flash game that was made as a joke and was put up on greenlight more likely than not expecting to get downvoted to hell and collect some tears. Let me re-ittarate it's a fucking flash game not a fucking hate crime. Protest something less trite that maybe actually matters.[/QUOTE] So, hey, if I decided I wanted to run around the street and call people dead-beat niggers, it's totally okay because I was trying to offend them? The problem I have with this isn't because he's trying to protest, it's because he sucks at satire and is buying into this piece of shit downward spiral of "social experiments" that aren't clever, aren't funny, and don't prove anything. I appreciate actual satire. More importantly, this guy thinks that he's allowed to say whatever he wants because it's a "social experiment", and whatever he says as the mastermind experimenter is fine because it's all part of an epic ruse. He totally can't be culpable for whatever he says or do, guys! It was just a prank, man! Ease up, it was just a game about murdering the LGBTQ in a time where plenty of people legitimately [B][I][U]hate[/U][/I][/B] the LGBTQ.

This was fucking hilarious. When it said "AIDs carrier eliminated!" I couldn't contain my laughter.

[QUOTE=SteelSliver;47675089]This was fucking hilarious. When it said "AIDs carrier eliminated!" I couldn't contain my laughter.[/QUOTE] LMAO gay men are disproportionately affected by a devastating disease!

Valve absolutely has the right to deny any game from being sold on their platform, but I don't think the game developers shouldn't be allowed to distribute the game through their own channels. It's a disgusting message but frankly I don't like the idea of censoring messages that make us uncomfortable.

[QUOTE=geel9;47675518]Valve absolutely has the right to deny any game from being sold on their platform, but I don't think the game developers shouldn't be allowed to distribute the game through their own channels. It's a disgusting message but frankly I don't like the idea of censoring messages that make us uncomfortable.[/QUOTE] Learn what censorship actually means please.

[QUOTE=BreenIsALie;47675911]Learn what censorship actually means please.[/QUOTE] Valve isn't censoring anything. I don't have a problem with what Valve did. I have a problem with the general consensus and tone in this thread stating that the game shouldn't be made or distributed on the creators' own terms.

[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47663397]Valve also has every right to ban games featuring queer characters in any capacity, but I'm pretty sure most of us wouldn't be happy about that.[/QUOTE] It's much less offensive to be accepting of something than it is to use hateful language and advocate violence towards a particular demographic.

I will totally admit to something that is true of the developer, however, and that is the fact that I'm posting about his work because I have free time. I don't really see the problem with it as long as it's not taking over my life or taking up too much of my time. I don't really understand the idea that posting about X means I'm heavily invested about X, seeing as I spend less than a few minutes posting in my free time while things are happening. Talking about something doesn't mean investment or even caring about something. Isn't it weird that people judge others by how apathetic they are anyway? This entire game is a result of how one game developer "doesn't give a fuck" and how he believes others shouldn't care either. A lot of people judge others based on how much they "care" about forums, games, arguments, insults... why? I'm on board with saying people should develop thicker skin and that people are quick to be offended, but to say people should flat out not care about things is ridiculous.