If Ji said this to men and it got removed, everyone would be all up in arms that they changed a possible gay characters dialogue.
Progression, 1 step forward 12 steps back.
People like you are why New Jersey had to change their state flag:
Last edited by Eggowaffles; 2012-04-12 at 06:46 PM.
I think that people like myself are not outraged at the change itself. We're outraged at the outrage. I know that seems silly, but it's because be believe that the people claiming sexism and acting outraged by that are at best misguided and at worst intentionally misleading.
While homosexuality is becoming more accepted than it once was in media, there is still a strange prejudice against it (living in California, the gay marriage debate is insane). The thing is, there are people who are so offended by it, they will avoid something with it in it. I honestly know a guy who would never watch a Tom Hanks movie because he played a gay guy in one (Philidelphia). Whereas, from what I've seen, gay people won't avoid something simply because they aren't represented in it. I mean, if there was gay bashing, yes, they would avoid/protest (and rightfully so). But the absence of gay people won't keep them away. So while I don't agree with it, the homosexuality being absent or very subtle in WoW is a business decision that keeps the most players.
Thank you zomgname for the signature and avatar!
I didn't think they changed the drunken brawler thing because it offended people or there were kids around. I thought they changed it because they realized that it was stupid. The idea was good enough for a single movie (barely). That's it. And really only because it starred Jackie Chan.You're complaining about this when they changed the whole "drunken brawler" thing from monk tanks? It should be pretty obvious that they are certainly trying to make this game more appealing for children/people who are offended easily.
---------- Post added 2012-04-12 at 06:55 PM ----------
That's because many of the opponents of it seem to think that passing a law allowing it will mean they have to get married to a gay person. You know, like so many of the wives of republican congressmen did.While homosexuality is becoming more accepted than it once was in media, there is still a strange prejudice against it
or perhapsI can see both sides [...] but there's never going to be a weird asexual hybrid race of humans who are exactly alike; men will always be like Ji Firepaw.
or was it when I saidwhy not keep the line in, and have him later apologise to female players for his earlier attitude? have him learn something, everyone wins.
I think it was a really innocuous line of text
Last edited by squidbear; 2012-04-12 at 07:03 PM.
"Varian has flaws, he must die!"
"Thrall did what he felt was right, he must die!"
"Ji is a womanizer, he must die!"
"Oh this character with a name that is clearly meant to be a joke is a flirt. I can support this!"
"I quit WoW."
Over the last few pages I don't recall any of the posters who approved of the change mentioning that they found it outright "offensive", or getting up in arms at all. They're simply understanding of the issue and sympathetic to those who might have had a problem with it.
If something really isn't a big deal either way, making a change to save someone's feelings is hardly a mortal sin.
You know after some thinking. I gotta ask this question. Alright, so if Ji Firepaw saying to a female that she is gorgeous, is super offensive to the point Blizzard MUST remove it. What about in undercity where humans are being experimented on with the plague? Of the poor young women that are wearing next to nothing, begging and pleading to be freed. Why is such cruelty not offensive but a female character being complimented on beauty, is offensive?
Jeez, is this thread really still going? Do people have nothing better to do than castrate Ji Firepaw?
The fact of the matter is that we're dealing with an area of the game that happens to be under development and completely subject to change right now, and that someone *did* feel strongly enough about it to raise the issue.
In this particular, comparatively unique case, it was acted upon, likely because the situation and the timing of it seemed appropriate to the developers.
Exaggerating and making a checklist of theoretical what-ifs doesn't really come into play unless they're issues that players demonstrably care about.
His line was in perfect tune with his character, saying the first thing that comes to his mind. In this case his first thought about the girls was ooh pretty.
Overall I feel this is a good discussion to have, even if folks can't agree. Especially if folks can't agree, actually. Doesn't do anyone any good to have their perspectives hidden -- because bringing things to light is the only way to understand the larger, fundamental issues at play. I just think where it gets obfuscated is that people are seeing different things as being the underlying issue.
I don't think the comment on looks is necessarily inappropriate for his character in general. However, I think it makes for a terrible first interaction. - The OP of the original protest thread.
Jeez guys, she wasn't trolling, she wasn't 'screaming' that she was offended or anything, she made a reasonable post.
It's not like Ji is OHMYGOD SO BLAND because of ONE dialogue change.