Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Sacred Sins, Profane Sacraments ([info]the_hierodule) wrote in [info]unfunny_fandom,
@ 2012-01-30 08:09:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Boggled

Tolerate my (friends) intolerance.
So. [info]bad_rpers_suck.

I know, I know. Fish, barrel. Hives of scum and villainy.

Fair warning; I am in the BRPS threads, making a couple of choice comments, but I decided to go with unfunny_fandom over i_wank due to... Well. Unfunny.

[info]wolfwonderess is not happy. Cruising for RP, she comes upon a RPG Site with some... very special rules.



[info]wolfwonderess comes across an RP site with a jarring ruleset that explicitly spells out that homosexual relations are not like other relations. Or, in their words

"[009];; Homosexual characters are allowed in the main role-play with the same limitations as heterosexual characters. However, if you plan to role-play a homosexual character with somebody, you must discuss it with them beforehand and respect any limits they may impose upon you, whether this means no sexual advances or no homosexual characters period. Spoiler tags must be used if a post includes any sort of physical, homosexual interaction. Minor flirting allowed without tags."

When Wolfwonderess points out that, hey, this is kinda offensive, she's told that, no it totally isn't, because there are two religious members on the board who're uncomfortable with homosexuality and besides, there used to be a NO HOMO rule before, so this is actually a compromise and besides one of the mods is pansexual, so there's totally no bigotry here.

Originally, I was going to let this one slide for a number of reasons; it's not really unusual to see people making games with stupid rules, I wasn't aware of the site link, and so forth, and so on.

But this thing just won't stop.

From site members supporting Wolfwonderess in personal messages, to an invite to come discuss the issue in the site's cbox - apparently from either a staff member or one of the people bothered by homoesxuality, if I read it correctly.

Not so much; the convo got the cbox shut down, and then it spilled on over to RPG-Directory - it's cut short, though.

Then Wolfwonderess has an earnest chat with the admin via PM, which she puts up on GoogleDocs. The pertinent point?

When Wolfwonderess asks "would you let them include a limit like "I won't RP with black characters"?"

The answer was "Yes, yes, I would."

Of course, beyond just complaining on her deviantart account (and getting a counter-complaint), the admin has also been shifting the rule. You'd think that just removing any references to sexuality at all would fix the issue (maybe rewrite it a little so it doesn't look weird), but no. It keeps morphing. And despite attempts to get "better" at this whole "compromise" thing... It doesn't.


I'm not going to troll the wank. I'm not going to go on their site, or RPG-D, or deviantart and yell at them.

I am going to make sure that my friends and acquaintances stay away, though.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]galateus
2012-01-30 09:18 pm UTC (link)
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that their hideously styled dA journal (that I had to view the source code for in order to find the link to the individual entry charmingly titled 'Lolzies') also includes stamps for 'Global Warming is a load of crap. Get Over It.' and 'Shut Up About Mary Sues'.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]eleutheria
2012-01-31 01:54 am UTC (link)
One of these things is not like the others?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-01-31 02:39 am UTC (link)
That's what I was thinking. I have a great amount of sympathy with "Shut Up About Mary Sues." Even if I didn't, global warming matters rather more.

I'm not surprised they use itty bitty text that I won't even try to read because I don't like headaches.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]full_metal_ox
2012-02-03 01:41 am UTC (link)
I have a great amount of sympathy with "Shut Up About Mary Sues."

Particularly given that the criterion thereof seems to have degenerated from, "Does the character threaten the ecology of the story?"--which is the only working definition that matters--to, "Is the character in violation of such-and-such arbitrary Literary Sumptuary Laws?" or even, "Does the character have the temerity to be breathing the same air as Bishie McHotstuff?"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-02-03 02:00 am UTC (link)
Yep. I've seen it degenerate over the years from, "the character warps all other character's personalities so that they only exist to show how awesome she is," to "the character does heroic things," to "the character is pretty and likable," to "the character is attractive to one or more male characters," to "the character is female."

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]the_hierodule
2012-02-01 01:26 am UTC (link)
And she'd like to hear your opinion, but only if you agree with her.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map