Support NeoGAF

[aeolist]

I really don't understand why this is still going on. Oh yeah, probably because it's an easy story for sanctimonious gaming journalists to whip up.

why not just read the op?

 

[WonderPup]

Rape jokes can be offensive to some people, so those kinds of jokes shouldn't be made.

But why stop there?

We should ban ALL subjects that people find offensive from being in jokes. If anyone is offended by it in the slightest, we should punish the person making the joke. And if you're in the US and have a First Amendment right to free speech, it should be revoked.

Yeah! That'll teach 'em! NO MORE JOKES!

 

[Night_Trekker]

I'd argue that leaving the strip up and saying we don't purposefully offend people but we also won't hold back, on any topic, would do that just fine. Profiting off of the comic, creating merchandising, wearing it to a convention with the stated goal of being "all-inclusive, because we're all outcasts", and encouraging your fans to do the same, is an aggressive move. And aggression when it comes to the specific topic of rape just doubles down on the issue, I think.

There us nothing inherently wrong with profiting from selling the shirt. And all of these posts that say "they could have achieved the same thing by doing things differently" is completely missing the point. It seems to me they're sending the message "we are not going to do anything differently."

And spare me the "aggressive" nonsense. Aggression is not inherently bad. Neither is it inherently sexual in this context. Some people will interpret things that way (almost every time, in some cases, regardless of context), but PA seems to be saying, once again, "our behavior isn't changing, because we believe your complaints aren't valid." Let's try not to be disingenuous when speculating as to why they believe those complaints are invalid.

 

[darkpower]

Fair enough. I suppose the "why" is that the tone of your opening and subsequent posts seem to be coming at this topic more in search of validation for your preconceived opinion on the matter and less in search of an objective and open discussion.

Not that you are in any way obligated to be objective on the matter, tis your opinion. That's my opinion on the whole thing, anyways.

I won't lie that the Jessica Nigiri mess soured my view on PA. A proven gamer gets singled out like that? No thanks.

This whole thing of opening old wounds doesn't help my view of them. This thread I intended to allow for objectivity, so there you go.

 

[Mr.Monitor]

Okay, so let me pose a hypothetical question that I won't give my opinion on right away. I'm just going to ask to see what people think (and I apologize if it sounds like I'm implying something or if it seems inappropriate. I honestly am just wanting to see what people believe).

I've given the 411 about the Jessica Nigiri incident, and then, of course, we have the 2010-2013 Dickwolves controversy. Given the outrage over the Dickwolves controversy and how the Nigiri thing was handled (and you can throw in the trans thing in here, too, if you want), do you think that perhaps there's a hidden misogynistic conspiracy at work here? You think that there's a more sinister reason for their handling the Dickwolf controversy, or Jessica (or even there being a hidden agenda behind their own booth babe rule), given who might be the first to complain?

In other words, are they one of the reasons why we have people like Anita Sarkeesian calling the game community an "unquestioned boys club"?

Fuck guys, they're onto us.

 

[Sojgat]

This is incorrect. True that the quote originated from an article interview about the bill, and he mentions the desecration of the graves. But the quote itself is about people in general. Not anti-semitic looters or anyone specific.

I know, that's why I said "he's talking about the kind of outrage", not "he's talking about the looters outrage". The sentiment can be applied to any group of people who think their personal sensibilities gives them the right to antagonize those they disagree with. Like cartoonists and their fans being publicly hostile to victimised women who didn't like one of their comic strips.

 

[Gannd]

Oh yes. Follow the money. Clearly anything to keep women down is fair game.

Gaming is an "unquestioned boys club" because the people making games now were the people playing games 10, 15, 20 years ago and developed a lifelong passion for it, and they happened to be overwhelmingly male. As more women get interested in playing games they too will aspire to make games and the ratio will begin to balance out. Now whether you think the gaming industry should accelerate that trend and make a conscious effort to make games that appeal to women is a debate that we can have until the cows come home. But seriously, there's no "He-Man Woman Hater's Club" bullshit going on here.

i sometimes wish I could apply that logic to being a Nintendo fan. We hear that Nintendo consoles cannot sell third party core games. Well, they don't make many (good) core games for Nintendo platforms. To me it's the same as games made that are more "woman" friendly. Does audience drive the content or does content drive the audience. I'm not sure if women will every be more than a minority of the "core" gamers space. I know someone is going to present some stats about how much of the audience is made up of woman but I'm talking the traditional core gaming space which is still predominately male. But, you're exactly right that as more girls play games and grow to love it, they'll want to make them and things will balance out.

 

[not psycho]

I thought the joke was fine. They could have replaced it with something like the punishment of Prometheus... "each day an eagle is sent to feed on my liver, which then grows back to be eaten again the next day." But the idea is the slaves are in ridiculously hellish circumstances, and you're not saving them because the quest doesn't say so.

But the t-shirts were definitely an asshole move. Defend the comic, but there is no need to go out of your way to hurt the people that didn't like it. Also, the shirts lose the actual message of the comic, and come across more as the exact thing those people said the comic was in the first place.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Rape jokes can be offensive to some people, so those kinds of jokes shouldn't be made.

But why stop there?

We should ban ALL subjects that people find offensive from being in jokes. If anyone is offended by it in the slightest, we should punish the person making the joke. And if you're in the US and have a First Amendment right to free speech, it should be revoked.

Yeah! That'll teach 'em! NO MORE JOKES!

Personally, I think it's entirely possible to concede that perhaps some of the uproar over the dickwolves strip comes across as overly sensitive while also believing that a post like your's is uninsightful and completely misses the point by a country mile.

 

[Cels]

i thought the original strip was perfectly fine - it set to point out how mmo quests are a little ridiculous and often players just do things driven not by story but by material reward. they threw in a little quip about rape and people got mad, even though the joke wasn't even really about rape. at this point you're pretty dumb if you think penny arcade is contributing in any way to rape culture. i mean, the joke is "rape is bad, but you're not going to rescue the guy because you already fulfilled your quota."

okay, whatever, all penny arcade had to do at that point was to calmly respond to the criticism, instead of escalating the situation and drawing the ire of thousands of people across the internet. it just got out of hand from there, and both sides are to blame. have no idea why they would dig this up again.

 

[JDSN]

Not this shit again, even with the usual ignorant user misunderstanding the Stephen Fry offended quote, someone seeing Penny Arcade as a defender of freedom of speech and the guy that fails to see the issue therefore "bitches be crazy". It just needs someone quoting some random woman that didn't find anything wrong about this horrible series of mocks coming from a sad misanthrope that ended becoming what he hated the most.

 

[Pie and Beans]

I was mostly talking about how gaming culture must be perceived from the outside in general, because of the aggressively hostile and bigoted behaviour towards anyone who isn't white/heterosexual/male.

But regarding conventions/conferences: they're in general fine in many aspects, but I've heard about, read about, and attended both consumer and industry-oriented events, privately and publicly, and some of the stuff is very toxic and unwelcoming to some people who aren't heterosexual men.

This is just an unacceptable level of painting in broadstrokes response. To fight what you find offensive you don't become an extremist and start demonising entire hobbyist cultures because that then paints your own collective as a "gang of nutters you shouldn't listen to".

Not this shit again, even with the usual ignorant user

Boy, I'm out. No idea why the "outrage" side of this whole kerfuffle can be easily painted as knee-jerk nonsense pushers. No idea at all!

 

[Lime]

In other words, are they one of the reasons why we have people like Anita Sarkeesian calling the game community an "unquestioned boys club"?

The Dickwolves ordeal is one of the many examples of how parts of gaming culture and its major power holders show much systematic and collective opposition and hostility against women. See also this article for a look into how it's an example of how hypermasculinity in gaming culture marginalizes and discriminates against women: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08838151.2012.705199

Furthermore, you have so many examples and instances of parts of gaming and industry culture being sexist, whether it is in the design process of a game, production designs, marketing strategies, lack of media coverage, competitive gaming's toxic culture, industry events catering to men only, conventions suffering from sexual harassment and threats, online gaming communication targetting womem, fan reactions and defenses of sexist ideals, consumer apathy by silent majority, and many, many other cases of exclusionary behaviour.

Not that gaming culture and industry is the only cultural domain with sexism in its norms, structures and behaviours, as many other domains in soceities suffer from the same inequalities. But parts of gaming culture is pretty toxic and hostile against "others"

 

[WonderPup]

Personally, I think it's entirely possible to concede that perhaps some of the uproar over the dickwolves strip comes across as overly sensitive while also believing that a post like your's is uninsightful and completely misses the point by a country mile.

Maybe so, but I would counter that most jokes are offensive to someone somewhere. The more PC we become over comments obviously made in jest, the more apt we are to end up with....well, the type of world we're quickly building for ourselves -- where no one can say anything without fear of reprisal.

Hyperbole? Yes. But if you don't like it, you're always FREE to tune out.

 

[Lime]

This is just an unacceptable level of painting in broadstrokes response. To fight what you find offensive you don't become an extremist and start demonising entire hobbyist cultures because that then paints your own collective as a "gang of nutters you shouldn't listen to".

Read the post again. Cons/conferences are IN GENERAL pretty fine, but SOME INSTANCES show exclusionary or discriminatory behaviour against others.

Stop trying to project something onto my posts that isn't there.

 

[Village]

This is incorrect. True that the quote originated from an article interview about the bill, and he mentions the desecration of the graves. But the quote itself is about people in general. Not anti-semitic looters or anyone specific.

No No it isn't.

Because if it is, Stephen Fry doesn't have any context of history at all, I believe that man is smarter than that.

 

[LocalE]

These ideas have been mainstreamed to the extent that Krahulik and Holkins cannot get away with pretending that it's only a vocal minority who see problems with using rape as a punchline which don't extend to problems with using murder in the same way.

I do think rape is a perfectly acceptable punchline. That's what the punchlines of many jokes are: awful, senseless, traumatic, depressing events or circumstances that human beings deal with via laughter.
Death, disease, tragedy, pain, etc....sometimes, all you can do is laugh.

I just don't see why rape as an awful part of some humans existence rules it out as potentially humorous material. All other tragic human experience is fair game.

 

[bootski]

i don't think making a comment on the t-shirts was reopening the controversy. mike has apologized for lashing out the way he did 3 years ago (which was out of hand on both sides) and also for the transgender comments. both situations garnered way more attention than they deserved.

i don't think they should have pulled the tshirts either. while the comic and mike's reaction afterwards may have been offensive, it's well within their purview to be as offensive as they like. they didn't pull the tshirts back then because they were trying to be less offensive, they did it as a business decision, as his comments yesterday show.

 

[SummitAve]

Nothings off limits when it comes to humor, but this is just garbage. I mean, it just isn't very funny...There is nothing clever about it and comes off as random thoughtless writing.

 

[Muffdraul]

I know, that's why I said "he's talking about the kind of outrage", not "he's talking about the looters outrage". The sentiment can be applied to any group of people who think their personal sensibilities gives them the right to antagonize those they disagree with. Like cartoonists and their fans being publicly hostile to victimised women who didn't like one of their comic strips.

What you said was "He's talking about the kind of outrage those looters felt towards the Jews." And that's bullshit.

 

[Risible]

Ryan was also quick to recognize his faults and when he went too far. If he felt like he genuinely hurt someone, he immediately recanted.

This is the guy who went on his site's forums to repudiate anyone defending him for saying "faggot" live on air and apologizing profusely for using the phrase.

That's how you act like an asshole with class.

He really was a magnificent bastard. As soon as he said it he regretted it, manned up and apologized and said it was in no way correct, and then went on to defend his detractors by saying "Oh no, they're right, I was an asshole for saying that." God I miss hearing him every week.

 

[JDSN]

Boy, I'm out. No idea why the "outrage" side of this whole kerfuffle can be easily painted as knee-jerk nonsense pushers. No idea at all!

Pretty ironic considering that the reason most people (you included) post that quote is because they are too lazy too say: "I think you are being unreasonable and no explanation of your position will change that". That's what it amounts and I've seen it used in many threads about this issue by people with inconsistent views on what they perceive as "freedom of speech".

But hey, im sure that a person from a struggling minority like Stephen Fry was talking about whinny folk talking shit about someone that makes rape jokes and thinks being a transvestite is like being a dolphin.

 

[Kadayi]

That's a fair point, and I appreciate it. There's still the issue of triggers, but I understand that society can't necessarily pussy-foot around things like that. There were better ways to handle the response for people like that though, on both sides.

For sure. I don't think anyone denies that. As regards the issue of triggers, rape is not a word that can be easily excised from general dialogue because it doesn't possess many equivalents (violation is the only one that springs to mind) and in a lot of ways it shouldn't be, because it serves an important purpose in terms of expressing an unacceptable act.

Out of curiosity, would people have had a problem with this if the character had said that he was tortured?

If it was 'tortured' probably not, if it was 'waterboarded' and the contextual setting was a military base probably.

 

[ElFly]

Maybe so, but I would counter that most jokes are offensive to someone somewhere. The more PC we become over comments obviously made in jest, the more apt we are to end up with....well, the type of world we're quickly building for ourselves -- where no one can say anything without fear of reprisal.

Hyperbole? Yes. But if you don't like it, you're always FREE to tune out.

Turns out rape victims find pretty hard to tune out memories of rape.

But yeah let's pretend that we are killing all humor with political correctness.

Reductio ad absurdum is a typical argument for ridiculous opinions.

 

[Off-Kilter]

This entire situation is... ugh.

It's no longer about the rape joke. It happened, they got criticized for it, and what should've happened is that they bury the ordeal and move on. But then they started the whole nonsense about the t-shirts and then wearing the t-shirts to PAX, which is just about one of the most immature responses I've witnessed from a grown man (men?).

Look, I'm not even that outraged over the comic. But they got called out for it, and sometimes you need to man up, accept the criticism, and let it go. Instead, they decided to act like children, and now it seems that they still can't get over it.

 

[MrGerbils]

There is also a third possibility: 3) You are chiefly concerned with making it crystal clear that you will express yourself no matter who it offends. Even if you know for a fact it will offend certain, specific people.

Your 3) is exactly the same as his 2), just worded a little more MRA style. His 2), for reference:

2) You are deliberately intending to make those people uncomfortable. You have found their weak point and you intend to exploit it. You cannot claim ignorance or naivete as an excuse; you have been informed of how these people feel and you are using that knowledge to your advantage.

Now lets just mash both of them together too how it's clearly the same thought:

You are chiefly concerned with making it crystal clear that you will express yourself no matter who it offends, by deliberately intending to make those people uncomfortable. you know for a fact it will offend certain, specific people, and as such You cannot claim ignorance or naivete as an excuse; you have been informed of how these people feel and you are using that knowledge to your advantage.

It's called being an inconsiderate shithead, and a bully.

 

[badgenome]

If you understood the context of that image macro, you would realise why it is not appropriate to use it here.

Fry was not railing against the concept of offence in abstractia, but the specific usage of it by some on the Christian right to argue against Equal Marriage. Making rape jokes =/= a fundamental human right being denied to a segment of society.

No, he was not (32 minutes in). He was railing against enforced "respect" and, specifically, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006.

 

[Zoc]

The only thing I don't understand about this debate is why people on PA's side get so angry. The whole history of this thing is simple: PA made a joke about something that lots of people think is too serious for joking; those people got angry: PA didn't say sorry; those people are still angry.

Feminists believe that this kind of joke is indirectly harmful to all of us. They have reasons for believing that which you may not agree with, but that do have reasons. Why do expect them not to get angry in a situation like this? What "hidden agenda" do you think they are pushing? It all seems pretty straightforward to me.

 

[Gannd]

The only thing I don't understand about this debate is why people on PA's side get so angry. The whole history of this thing is simple: PA made a joke about something that lots of people think is too serious for joking; those people got angry: PA didn't say sorry; those people are still angry.

Feminists believe that this kind of joke is indirectly harmful to all of us. They have reasons for believing that which you may not agree with, but that do have reasons. Why do expect them not to get angry in a situation like this? What "hidden agenda" do you think they are pushing? It all seems pretty straightforward to me.

Why are they allowed to get angry but not people who liked the comic?

 

[WonderPup]

Turns out rape victims find pretty hard to tune out memories of rape.

But yeah let's pretend that we are killing all humor with political correctness.

Reductio ad absurdum is a typical argument for ridiculous opinions.

No one can have an opinion that differs with yours as long as you declare you're offended. You're right.

 

[Homunculus]

Why are they allowed to get angry but not people who liked the comic?

Because one side believes themselves to be morally superior to the other.

 

[Anthropic]

I get uncomfortable about the puritanical urge to shun people because they said or believe something stupid.

I've learned so much from the new "inclusion culture" I've found on Twitter. I'm thinking about feminism and privilege much more often then I did before I started following so many inclusive people on Twitter.

But it makes me sad that these same people react with so much venom to people who say something dumb.

After Mike's dumb comments about transgender there was a moment where Jenn Frank was basically asking people to tone down their venom a bit and Courtney Stanton said some really vile things to her questioning her feminism and the people she chooses to associate with. At what point does that become harassment?

If people want to publicly say they're not going to attend PAX, that's their choice. But when it gets into this business where they try to make it seem like if you don't renounce Penny Arcade your enabling Mike's behavior that crosses a line that gets dangerously close to bullying.

I think it's wrong to think less of a Max Temkin, or Scott Kurtz, or Kathleen De Vere, or any of the indie developers who attended PAX because they still associate themselves with PAX and PA.

There would be no point in destroying this beautiful convention and this business because you think one of the founders is a jerk.

I dislike the people who run Hobby Lobby, Chik-Fil-A, Dominos, and Papa Johns but that doesn't mean it's right to shame people who like these business or work for these businesses.

If you never bought a product from people who never treated another person badly you would be living in a cold hut in the middle of the woods.

 

[POWERSPHERE]

How can we make PA disappear?

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I wish more people would see that it's OK to think the original joke isn't particularly offensive (I think it's fine) while simultaneously acknowledging that it might make some people uncomfortable and that we should try to show some empathy for those people instead of making comics and t-shirts to mock them.

Many people feel disenfranchised and ostracized because of this incident and I think we could all benefit from trying to see the story from that perspective instead of thinking things like "this doesn't offend me, so what's the big deal?"

So much this.

 

[Gannd]

How can we make PA disappear?

No one forces you to read it. I like the site and I'll continue to read it.

 

[Sojgat]

What you said was "He's talking about the kind of outrage those looters felt towards the Jews." And that's bullshit.

But it's not. Their outrage originated from their personal beliefs, which are the same things that cause anyone to be offended. Whether the beliefs are religious, political, learned from others, or based on personal experience. He's relating one situation to another, as I was trying to do (however unsuccessfully).

 

[Lime]

No one can have an opinion that differs with yours as long as you declare you're offended. You're right.

Some of those who were "offended" were rape victims. Some of those who were "offended" are women who are exposed to the possibility of rape in cultures that make light of it.

How can you not value or pay heed to the opinions of such people when they are the ones most definitely affected by the series of actions in question?

 

[Team Filler]

So much this.

Except it's coming from somebody that was cheerleader for a movement to ostracize George Kamitani over his artwork for Dragon's Crown.

 

[jetjevons]

Dominos, and Papa Johns.

Oh man. What don't I know about Dominos? Or Papa Johns?

Also, for what it's worth, I support PA's right to make anything a punchline just like I support their detractors right to protest and boycott their business because of said punchline.

I wouldn't read 'Electric Retard' but it's not my place to say it shouldn't exist.

Spoiler

I'm pretty sure it shouldn't exist.

 

[Riposte]

Penny Arcade dudes gained nothing from making an issue out of this. If they didn't think the criticisms had any worth, they should have just briefly said so and gone back to just focusing on the jokes. It is not like their gig was being interrupted or heckled. Seems like they were and are trying too hard to capture a certain image for themselves and going the wrong way about it in the first place. Basically, the great challenge to their art they've heroically taken on is mostly in their heads.

 

[Extra Sauce]

The original comic is hilarious, but the way Mike reacted to the mislead controversy was just as mislead.

 

[pizza dog]

I get uncomfortable about the puritanical urge to shun people because they said or believe something stupid.

I've learned so much from the new "inclusion culture" I've found on Twitter. I'm thinking about feminism and privilege much more often then I did before I started following so many inclusive people on Twitter.

But it makes me sad that these same people react with so much venom to people who say something dumb.

After Mike's dumb comments about transgender there was a moment where Jenn Frank was basically asking people to tone down their venom a bit and Courtney Stanton said some really vile things to her questioning her feminism and the people she chooses to associate with. At what point does that become harassment?

If people want to publicly say they're not going to attend PAX, that's their choice. But when it gets into this business where they try to make it seem like if you don't renounce Penny Arcade your enabling Mike's behavior that crosses a line that gets dangerously close to bullying.

I think it's wrong to think less of a Max Temkin, or Scott Kurtz, or Kathleen De Vere, or any of the indie developers who attended PAX because they still associate themselves with PAX and PA.

There would be no point in destroying this beautiful convention and this business because you think one of the founders is a jerk.

I dislike the people who run Hobby Lobby, Chik-Fil-A, Dominos, and Papa Johns but that doesn't mean it's right to shame people who like these business or work for these businesses.

If you never bought a product from people who never treated another person badly you would be living in a cold hut in the middle of the woods.

hey knuckleheads, Anthropic did and so can you

Re that trans* twitter-beeves around Gabe recently, I agree with you though. "Venom". The whole language around all this stuff is still such a mess. Phrases like "transphobic", "rape culture", etc are all so combative. Gabe can honestly not understand about gender/sex dichotomy without being afraid of or disgusted by trans* people. But if you don't know what that means and people start calling you bigot over a tweet it makes it real hard to want to learn, everything becomes about getting defensive.

It's so trite to say out loud but I wish the Internet was better at treating people like people. Shit's nuanced and subtle and everyone's hopefully still learning and encountering new things all the time. When people jump to calling Mike a monster it just makes everything messier. I personally think he's a guy with his heart in more-or-less the right place but his foot squarely in his mouth-place.

 

[Sats]

Some of my favorite jokes have been rape jokes!

 

[Anthropic]

Oh man. What don't I know about Dominos? Or Papa Johns?

In terms of Dominos it's some of the behavior of of the of the founders, Tom Monaghan: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/1...der-tom-monaghan-offer-workers-contraceptive/

I guess he sold his Dominos stake in 1998 though.

With Papa Johns it's the anti Obamacare stuff from last year: http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/n...ther-fast-food-chain-embroiled-in-culture-war

 

[Neverfade]

Oh man. What don't I know about Dominos? Or Papa Johns?

Not sure about Dominos, but Papa John bitches about not being able to afford healthcare for his employees while living in a fucking castle. (And that the solution to providing that healthcare has been proven to be an easily implemented insignificant cost per pizza)

 

[dead souls]

But it makes me sad that these same people react with so much venom to people who say something dumb.

I get where you're coming from, but in Mike from PA's case it isn't just saying something dumb. He's done this over and over again, nearly always doubling down, seemingly incapable of being educated no matter how many people try.

I'm all for giving people another chance when they say or do something stupid, we've all been there, but eventually enough is enough. At this point the venom is totally justified.

 

[faceless007]

Except it's coming from somebody that was cheerleader for a movement to ostracize George Kamitani over his artwork for Dragon's Crown.

An article for which he apologized and wrote a follow-up that included a full letter from Kamitani.

 

[Piers]

Well, it's no where near as bad as VGcats stint on coat hanger abortion IMO. (Especially for following up complaints with the dancing 'featus five')

 

[WonderPup]

Some of those who were "offended" were rape victims. Some of those who were "offended" are women who are exposed to the possibility of rape in cultures that make light of it.

How can you not value or pay heed to the opinions of such people when they are the ones most definitely affected by the series of actions in question?

It's not that I don't care how they feel about the joke. It's that I recognize the right to express yourself through art/comics/humor/text. Their comic strip mostly sucks (in my opinion), but disagreeing with their message doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to put it out there.

I see both perspectives; I just value one over the other. I highly doubt that strip was written to be offensive. They did it to be funny (but as usual, the strip is dumb). I also highly doubt that anyone that read it was traumatized.

Sure, they could have given more consideration to what they wrote, but then again, why bother? Show me a comedian that's funny that doesn't offend someone. Even Steve Martin's kitten juggling bit is going to be offensive to someone.

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
-- Voltaire

 

[Funchameleon]

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
-- Voltaire

I think this is why this tweet, while horrible, was so necessary for yourself and all the other "defenders of art and freedom"