Sanitizing Expression In Virtual Worlds 516
1up has a piece looking back at the GLBT guild mixup that happened earlier this year in World of Warcraft. From the article: "'... last summer a friend introduced me to WOW, and I really liked it, though I didn't care for remarks many of the players made, like the fact that everything is apparently so gay when it's bad. So I decided to create my own guild, which would be GLBT friendly.' Sometimes singing, other times slogging her way through WOW's exacting echelons to a formidable level 60, Andrews had big endgame plans for her developing guild--until January 12, 2006, that is, when a note from publisher Blizzard blinkered everything."
Oh man (Score:3, Funny)
Yea I hate it when things blink . . . I always seem to blink things up . . . Oh yea, well blink you too.
Re:Oh man (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh man (Score:3, Funny)
Someone's been playing a mage, I see.. :p
They gave you your life back (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They gave you your life back (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They gave you your life back (Score:2)
I don't think this guild is going around in the public areas having virtual gay sex with each other. Your comments just show yo
Re:They gave you your life back (Score:3, Informative)
My friend's son, was apparently using the term "gay" inappropriately. So he was reported and warned. Happened again and maybe a third time? BAN! Account terminated just like that.
Now there were some other things that happened too.
Too bad his son was bright enough to remove the warning messages before his father read them.
None the less, he learned a very valuable lesson: No matter how angry you get, if you talk trash in an inappropriate
Re:They gave you your life back (Score:4, Insightful)
You've never seen a female night-elf dance, have you?
Re:::kicks troll back under bridge:: (Score:4, Interesting)
But I thought that Starcraft verged on overt racism- the only black characters were the dumb, nose-picking, powerless SCV pilots- basically, the manual laborers. Everyone else is lily-white. Well, OK I think Duran from the expansion was black. And evil.
I don't buy into the concept of political correctness, but I do think that the vision promoted by Starcraft- where there aren't any positive portrayals of non-white humans- was really a step backwards from the vision promoted by Star Trek, where you've got blacks and asians and whatnot serving as equals. It's disappointing that Blizzard seems to be so backwards looking and narrow-minded in the fantasy worlds it creates.
Re:They gave you your life back (Score:3, Insightful)
Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds? (Score:2, Insightful)
I firmly believe that the ability to speak is a protected right directly protected by the right to personal property. I don't believe we need a government to protect our right to speech on our own land. I also believe we can censor whoever we want, as long as we're on our own land. Once we step onto their land, they have the power to control speech.
Most of the time the GLBT folks anger
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:5, Informative)
Your home is private property, but when you open your restaurant to the public, it becomes a 'public accomodation', and is not private property. This was an issue with a case against the Boy Scouts of America. They were sued because they discriminate against homosexuals. The courts ruled that the Boy Scouts were a private club, not a public accomodation, and that they were free to discriminate.
Some bars and restautants are also run as private clubs (playboy clubs (defunct), bottle clubs, etc). Most are public accomodations, with restricted 'property rights'.
Also, if you hire a person to work in your business, you are bound by labor laws. This includes not creating a 'hostile work environment' and other EEOC restrictions. If you don't like it, don't hire people in America.
re: Boy Scouts (Score:2)
Not much to say other than they treat themselves as a public accomodation when they feel like it (such as, utilizing our tax dollars to support the groups) and as a private club when they want to (creating environments of intolerance and the like)
Pretty interesting show, particularly the Mormons "hijacking" the BSA in the 70s.
Re: Boy Scouts (Score:3, Insightful)
Such a move on
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:2)
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:5, Insightful)
Control over property does not give you absolute right of speech within its borders. To pull out the old Supreme Court analogy, by your logic, if you owned a theater, that would give you permission to attend a crowded performance, yell "Fire!" and watch the havoc unfold. That is absolutely ridiculous.
I also believe we can censor whoever we want, as long as we're on our own land.
Sure thing. I'll throw out another analogy. You are a restaurant owner who happens to actively dislike black people. You own the restaurant, and it is your "own land." Does it follow that you can "censor" - e.g., deny access, refuse service, etc. - black people from going to your restaurant? (Hint - read the 1964 Civil Rights Act.)
I'm not anti-gay, anti-lesbian, anti-transgendered, but I am pro-freedom.
Please understand that you being pro-freedom necessarily implies that other people have the right to enjoy their freedoms as well, such as freedom from your asshatted bigotry.
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:2)
I detected no asshatted bigotry in his statement. You are projecting an attitude on him that's extremely negative when his actual statements were much less negative. This is an ad-hominem attack and is a debating technique to use when you don't have anything more solid.
Also, hauling out the 1964 Civil Rights Act as a defense is kind of silly, because the original poster would probably site that as an example of a broken law. That basically represents an argument by appealing to authority, and is also a
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:5, Insightful)
Err, it's not that funny. I think for as much as they've "historically been known to work against individual rights" they've been more known to be working FOR individual rights, namely, that no one from "big government" to anyone else should dictate who they fall in love with or what kind of sex they choose to have and with whom.
Seriously, the person who complained about a guild listing itself as "GLBT-friendly" was being a total ass, and the complaint have been treated accordingly. These guys weren't looking to ban players who casually throw around term "that's so gay", just trying to politely and fairly discretely advertise their group in a coded language to other people who might feel likewise.
Are you sure are just aren't a hypocrite? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Are you sure are just aren't a hypocrite? (Score:2)
The problem is that more often than not the entity you have to be afraid of IS the governing authority. Allowing the government to protect us only works if the government is made of better people than the citi
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:2)
New neighbor moves in across the street from Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith immediately detests this family, and wants them gone. He puts up a large sign in his yard that reads "To the Jones family: You are not welcome here. Get the fuck out of our neighborhood and go back to whatever cesspool you crawled out of." When their children are outside, he stands (on his own property, mind you,) and calls across the street to them, telling them that their parents are horrible, horrible
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:2)
Other than indecent exposure (still civil, iirc) though I'm not sure anything is technically "wrong". In bad taste, but not against the law. That's the way it is supposed to be though. You have the freedom to express yourself through appropriate channels
Re:Private Property rights exist in virtual worlds (Score:2)
There's the biggest problem with anarcho-capitalism today: there are so many reasons against it BECAUSE of other reasons against it, it would be hard to put into action wit
Wait.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Wait.. (Score:2)
Re:Wait.. (Score:2)
Re:Wait.. (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, really, if not 'getting any' = homosexual then /. would be the biggest gay site on the web.
Stop that! (Score:5, Funny)
Sometimes singing? Andrews? Her?
"Stop that! Stop that! You're not going into a song while I'm here. Now listen, lass. In twenty levels, you're getting married to a girl whose Tauren father pwns the biggest tracts of open land in all of Kalimdor!"
This shouldn't even be an issue. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ultimately, who cares? If people weren't such dicks and played the game without resorting to "omg u r a fag gtfo" then people wouldn't feel the need to make these guilds.
Of course, even then it wouldn't go away entirely, as people would form guilds just to try to be different.
My guild consists of men and women of differing ages, races, nationalities, and sexual orientations (really - I'm not joking), and we all have fun and just play the damn game. We don't care if one of our members is gay because IT DOESN'T MATTER. It doesn't give you a stat bonus, it doesn't make you a better player, so who cares?
I say leave the politics out of the game and just HAVE FUN!
Re:This shouldn't even be an issue. (Score:2)
If people ahd thicker skins, it wouldn't be an issue either.
Re:This shouldn't even be an issue. (Score:2)
Re:This shouldn't even be an issue. (Score:2, Insightful)
Um, sure. Everyone should just take their abuse with grace and aplomb. Gotcha.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This shouldn't even be an issue. (Score:2)
I'm a programmer. As such, I like to spend time with other programmers - I tend to get on better with them, if only because I have more in common with them. I don't play MMOGs, but
Well, I agree. (Score:4, Funny)
Our guild doesn't care if you're gay, straight, black, white, democrat, or republican. It just has no place it the game.
However, all the jews are losing 50 DKP tomorrow for killing our Lord and savior. Sorry, but if you nail the son of God to a 2x4, you're not going to get that epic chest piece.
Re:Well, I agree. (Score:5, Funny)
He doesn't. but there is a gaurd next to him that drops an epic polearm, but only AFTER he stabs the boss.
20 man raid.
sorry, could let that pass over....
Re:Well, I agree. (Score:3, Funny)
Dude, I totally need that +12 Spear of Destiny. I'm trying to kill Arael, the big glowy bird thing, it's got some real nasty psi attacks...
* throws spear *
w00t! Nailed it! TAKE THAT j00 ANGEL LUSER!
Er, the spear? Um. Over there somewhere...
Re:Well, I agree. (Score:3, Funny)
um (Score:2, Informative)
Sex & Violence (Score:4, Interesting)
Tor
The Problem Is Blizzard (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is that Blizzard does not correctly enforce their own policies. This person wanted to create a non-hostile environment for people that get offended by terms like 'man thats gay', or 'shut up fag'. Blizzard's own policies go against that type of speech in the first place, but it would seem impossible to effectivly enforce somthing like that
Depends (Score:2)
I would even say they were not morally wrong. Just enforcing a rule. If I had been starting a GBLT hatefull group, I am sure I woul;d have been banned for a couple of days. I am also sure they wouldn't change there stance like they did with this person.
Honestly, people... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Honestly, people... (Score:2, Insightful)
False. They say that players cannot, and I quote, "insultingly refer to any aspect of sexual orientation pertaining to themselves or other players." 'Insultingly' being the key word.
B) Saying GBLT Friendly is discrimination against people who aren't GBLT friendly.No; it's discrimination against the ideas that those people hold. Discriminating against ideas is okay; discriminating against the people who hold those ideas isn't.
C) It's stoopid and doesn't ma
Soapbox rant of the whale (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Soapbox rant of the whale (Score:3, Informative)
Hence the no discussion of sexuality rule.
Real World Politics in the Game Dangerous... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not discriminating against anyone to not allow real world affiliations in a game. Because a game involves violence, you want the victims and perpetrators of violence to be completly fictional groups. If you have real life affiliations like Sex, Race, Religion, Sexual Preference, and it is going to cause all kinds of problems.
I realize that nowadays, politically correct posturing trumps common sense, and so people are going to cry that they are being discriminated against because they can't create a Gay, Bi, Lesbian, Transexual clan... and the threats of lawsuits will probably give them their way. But demanding to be allowed to make a GLBT guild, when all other real world affiliations are banned, is just stupid. GLBT are not discriminated from playing the game, or from starting clans, but they are (or where) banned from bringing real world issues into a totally fantasy escapist game.
Language evolves as does slang, deal with it (Score:5, Insightful)
There are parts of the country where soda is referred to as 'pop' but that doesn't mean people are asking you for a grandparent or a punch in the jaw when they say "give me a pop". In the same way in my encounters with people saying "that's totally gay" they don't mean "that's totally homosexual" or "I hate that in the same way I hate homosexuals" they in fact mean it as "that's totally stupid/absurd/odd". It is an ALTERNATE SLANG MEANING that has been appropriated by a subset of the culture, just as homosexuals and society re-appropriated the word 'gay' itself about a generation or two ago.
In New England we say 'wicked' to mean 'very', e.g. "The new console is wicked cool". However in this usage it has nothing to do with being evil. In some places in NY people use 'mad' the same way New Englanders use wicked, but they don't mean angry in any way. A word can have two different and unrelated meanings!
To be offended by an alternate use of a word you happen to associate with is silly when it's patently not being used offensively. Could it be used offensively? Has it been? Yes. But this is not one of those examples. And in the case of the word gay itself the argument even becomes hypocrtical since gay already had a different meaning which has been appropriated by today's culture to mean something completely different. Language evolves, and slang is simply a genetic mutation of language, often here today gone tomorrow. If you can't get over that then you're taking yourself way too seriously and need to find a better battle to fight.
Re:Language evolves as does slang, deal with it (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, just shooting from the hip aren't you. You just assumed from the start I was trying to advocate the use of gay as a derogatory term. did you even read my whole comment? I specifically said that in the given context not only was it not being used as a derogatory term for homosexuals, but that it had a different meaning altogether unrelated to sexual orientation. Why can't people understand that? I even gave you two examples of other words - 'wicked', and 'mad' - and how regional slang uses them to mean 'very' but without any relation to the other meanings of those words. I was pointing out that in the context it was being used, the term 'gay' meant stupid or perhpas absurd, but not in any relation to someone being gay. Or that the person using it that way thinks gays are stupid or absurd. If you ever encounter someone who says something like "that rule is gay" and you confront them on it they'll always point out they don't mean it as a derogatory homosexual remark, and not because they're just some backpedaling racist, most kids don't even realize someone would take offense at it because to them it's wholly unrelated in their mind. It's unrelated to gays and gay culture! You personally seem to to think that because they use gay to mean 'absurd' they are therefore making some larger political statement that they believe all homosexuals to be absurd, but it's not the case. The racial terms you listed above are purely racial slurs (except for chink, see your other replies). So if I say "there's a chink in your defenses! we will surely destroy you!" Does that mean I am implying there is either an actual asian in your defenses and that is why they are weak, because I believe asians to be weak? You don't concede that it's entirely possible the word could have an alternate non-deragatory meaning? For fuck's sake, I know gay rhode island kids who themselves have exclaimed "that's wicked gay!" and they weren't talking about their boyfriend.
As to the going on WoW and complaing about something being "jew cheap" you're not even giving some alternate meaning of jew there, you're using it as a classic deragatory slur against jews and the falsehood they are miserly, so how does that even work as an example? In addition you're trying to take words which have exclusively been used as slurs (jew, nigger, wop) and sticking them into a context in which they cannot fit because of the huge stigma attached to those words. My point also was based on the fact that gay has been used widely in our recent cultural history with a completely different meaning that has no such stigma. So just because 'gay' or some other word may be transmutable, that doesn't mean any old slur with a history behind it could be. I'm not gay bashing here, I'm not advocating racism, it's stupid and useless and based on utter falsehoods. But for a group of people to change the meaning of a word and use it to represent themselves and somehow think they then have exclusive control over the future evolution of that word is a ludicrous assertion. Language is an amorphus thing, and it will continue to change, it IS POSSIBLE for two words to have DIFFERENT AND UNRELATED meanings.
Oh wow... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It is supposed to be "family friendly".. (Score:2)
Re:It is supposed to be "family friendly".. (Score:2)
No we must limit all WOW guilds to celibate losers
Re:It is supposed to be "family friendly".. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It is supposed to be "family friendly".. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It is supposed to be "family friendly".. (Score:5, Funny)
As a married man, I would like to categorically object to the linking of marriage with sex.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Insightful)
Dick Haney: Look out Georgy! Terrorists!
Prezy-Dent: Oh no, protect me Dick Haney!
Dick Haney: Don't worry, I'll blow them up...
And on and on and on. Clear, OBVIOUS, greifing. They were out to do nothing about annoy people. That was within the first half-hour I played the game. If I'm going to play a MMO I want to play a MMO. I don't want nonsense (relative to the game world) about the president of the US, advertising for GLBT guilds, or anything else like that. The game is supposed to be escapist. You want to do all that stuff, go to second life (a sandbox) or invent a virtual world that is supposed to mirror the real world in many ways.
And I wouldn't care if everyone in your guild WAS GLBT. You could advertise yourself outside of WoW as the GLBT guild, but don't drag that kind of stuff into the game. p>While I understand how the person felt with all the "this is gay" (I got sick of it real fast and I'm straight, so I can see how they felt), there is no need to draw that into the game and start a GLBT guild. Just ignore those people, or report it to Blizzard and see if they'll give the person a warning.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:3, Insightful)
Amazing self centeredness.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't you see the hypocisy in your comment? You don't want to be harassed or bombarded. That's exactly what the GBLT guild wants - to escape from the harassment.
How does them having a guild where they can play together "harass" you in any way? In contrast, they are the ones being harassed by all
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:5, Insightful)
All the time. They're the guys screaming "gay" "fags" etc every 10 seconds. The majority makes their declaration by demonstration.
Only minority groups have to make explicit declarations, in order to notify potential members that they are different from the masses. This works as both an advertisement and a warning.
~Rebecca
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
So; what sorts of guilds should be allowed to advertise?
If you don't want to deal with anything "like that", maybe you should stay away from MMOGs - because, you know, the whole point of an MMOG is to interact with a community of people, and some of those people might not be just like you. You are basically saying "everyone should want to play the game and interact with
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Interesting)
Blizzard, by the way, (and this may change but I doubt it will) does not generally police channel speech, and GMs are incredibly slow to respond to even extremely outrageous actions. So "report people using the word gay" is hardly a reasonable answer. Actively attempting to create an environment that is more friendly is a totally acceptable reaction. I've belonged to a guild were were didn't allow trash talk or l33t speak on guild channel. Thats more or less the same thing as the guild in TFA was doing.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Funny)
You must be new here.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
2. The way some people talk, merely stating one is gay is somehow "talking about their sex life". I could understand if you were talking about someone going around the office saying they just put their cock into someone else but if they are just relaying a state of being, that t
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:3, Insightful)
The current set up is giving a few people who happen to have some strategically placed capital control a chunk of society. It's never been a good thing.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Insightful)
If they want to eliminate all guilds with messages from rl, thats fine. But they need to target everyone equally, not just certain ones.
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
I mean, if your going to argue that a gay guild is forcing a message on people simply by existing, then a religious guild is doing likewise. If it's unfair for the guild to allow/exclude membership based on RL factors, like being gay, then it's likewise unfair to restrict membership based on religion.
And if you take the opposite approach, which is to say that people can form guilds based on whatever criteria they like (ex
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:2)
So are the folks bitching about the "chinese gold farmers", the "twinks in the 10-19 bg" and everything else.
Your speech in game is (probably) a reflection of the cultural norms that you grew up with/live in. Sure, some people are actually role-playing, but most people on those games aren't. Their cha
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, in public places they do. You know... First admentment and whatnot.
But in private places like WoW... Well it is a matter of tresspassing.
Think of it like this...
Your invited to someone's house to play AD&D. During the game, one of the players keeps on going on a diatribe how the other player is oppressing his sexual orientation.
You can of course say "You... You shut the hell up!" or ignore him, but he can go on and on as long as the owner of the house says he can. You as a guest of that house cannot remove the other person or force him to be silent. You can of course take your issue up with the house owner, but you do not have a single right or legal ability to make that other person be silent.
So as long as the owner approves either with consent or non-action, the person making this activist diatribe has the right to implant his agenda into your mind via means of sounds and images (as long as those sounds and images are legal).
You can of course always leave...
However, if it was your house... Then you can remove the guy from your premises, but obviously none of us own the WoW servers.
Even if it is a game, it is not your game. It is Blizzard's game and you have as much rights on their property as they say you do.
If they let people do this to you, then either you need to ignore it, take it up with Blizzard, or quit.
Yes, people *do* just want to play (Score:3, Insightful)
Did you read TFA? Nobody's trying to "intrude" any "message", unless it's the person who tried to get the GLBT Guild banned. The only purpose of the guild was for people with similar interests to play together. I've never played this MMOG, but I assume that's the main reason people join guilds.
People love to accuse gays of "activism" and "recruiting", when what they really mean is, "STFU, so I can pretend you d
Re:Maybe People Just Want to Play (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the word "nigger" IS used in public spaces with great frequency, in in a deeply pejorative sense--by African Americans urbanites. It's only NON-African-Americans who aren't allowed to use it.
The whole "politics of language" is distorted and very illogical--the use typically reflects the agenda of the person in question.
C.f. pretty much any film by Spike Lee.
Re:This story is so gay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This story is so gay (Score:5, Insightful)
So by proclaiming that one is gay, and by advertising for a gay guild without being censored by the authorities, you have "forced" people to consider the fact that people playing the game may actually be gay, and that they have the same rights to speech and to association as all other citizens.
That's the logic, such as it is.
All these people keep saying they don't want to hear about it, because they don't care. This is nonsense, they obviously care very much or they'd let it be, instead of feeling like you are imposing on them merely by declaring your existence. What they really mean is that they don't want to hear anything about gay people, so they can pretend everyone is straight. This is why having your own little gay club offends them -- they can no longer pretend that people in that guild are straight, and you have "forced" them to realize that they are sharing a game server with a homosexual.
It's as lame an answer as saying that it's the GLBT groups who brough sexual preference into the game in the first place. No, it's the people using "faggot" as their pejorative of choice that brought the issue of homophobia into the game. A GLBT group is just an attempt to escape from this environment. It's as ludicrous as blaming a black person for bringing race issues into the game when he complains that everyone is tossing "nigger" around with reckless abandon.
Oh, but of course racism is frowned upon by mainstream society, and thus spewing "lol u nigger" would be frowned upon. It's still socially acceptable to be a homophobe, so "i hate teh gheys" is fine, everyday speech and "hey I'm gay that offends me" is bringing up issues that don't belong in the game.
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2, Insightful)
But would you rather say that you're offended by the mere existence of homosexuality? Get over it. Like Werbach's quote from TFA, "With ov
Re:This story is so gay (Score:3, Insightful)
Now I have to worry about being called a homophobe or something like that, because I am having fun doing what I like (attacking other players). Could they even charge me with a hate crime, because after all, I am "simulating violence" against a "Gay" group, and could that be interpreted as an endorcement of violence agai
Re:This story is so gay (Score:4, Insightful)
What, exactly, is the "gay agenda" again? I keep forgetting. Wasn't it something about not being treated as second-class citizens for being gay? Yes, they have absolutely no right to insist that we treat like human beings. Or do you mean another agenda, like their plot to take over the world and force all the rest of us to be gay too?
Married het female, if you're wondering. I'm wondering how a comment about with the words gay agenda got modded up. That smacks of anti-gay paranoia.
Re:This story is so gay (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I s
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2)
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:This story is so gay (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps it's because everyone else won't get beaten to death and chained to a fencepost, and then have their funeral picketed by lunatics [wikipedia.org] just for being who they are.
Maybe that's why they see this as controversial.
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2)
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2)
While I don't use 'gay' to mean 'uncool' or 'crappy' it doesn't have the impact you think it does. Words with multiple definitions do not automatically tie those definitions together.
Conotations and denotations. (Score:2)
Denotation: Happy. Loose or lewd.
Connotation: Homosexual.
So if you use a word which is widely used to label homosexuals, and then use it in the context which means bad, well, you're changing the meaning of the word, and building up an association.
Negroid means having characteristics of a negro. The was slanged up into the form known as nigger.
nigger \nig"ger\, n.
A negro; -- in vulgar derision or depreciation. It is usually
"gay" is like "hacker". (Score:3, Insightful)
For any of you reading this
Re:This story is so gay (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice try though.
And I think it should (Score:3, Insightful)
So ya, Christian, Atheist, Gay, Lesbian, Republican, Democrat, White, Asian, and so on guilds
Too many Chuck Norris jokes... (Score:2)
Chuck Norris will round house kick your
-Rick
Re:This story is so gay (Score:2)
Re:In Short... (Score:2)
Even better (Score:2)
I perfer GEBLT:
Green Eggs, Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato
Re:Legal action may not be the best alternative. (Score:2)
A lot of 'decent' people merely prefer not to be vocal about their feelings. Some of them may not even be fully conscious of their bias.
It's usually known as "soft bigotry"
Re:Legal action may not be the best alternative. (Score:2)
Laws about what is expect with a public Accomendation already exist.
Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:2)
Hey now! That's ableism [wikipedia.org]!
Re:I've said it before, I'll say it again. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't care, then why are you so offended by it?