Xbox 360

[Zombipanda]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't make any sense.

What you're saying is

Orientation = A topic of a sexual nature

"Happily married" = (At least in most parts of America) A man in a relationship with a woman = Totally fine

The rules say "stand for, hint at, abbreviate, or insinuate or relate to". "Happily married" easily stands for, hints at, abbreviates, or insinuates or relates to the fact that whoever said it is heterosexual.

And besides that, neither statement is really inherently sexual. You can't blame anyone for reading those rules and not thinking that "I'm gay" translates to some kind of intensely explicit sexual statement. People seem to be saying that they don't want their kids seeing it because they don't want to have to explain to them what being gay is, because this would apparently involve defining sodomy and showing them several hours of gay porn.

Some boys like girls, some boys like boys, and some girls like girls. It's not just about sex, if it was then anything that even suggests a relationship between two people would be defined as sexual. Mickey and Minnie Mouse's relationship would be "of a sexual nature".

If none of it's important then they shouldn't allow any of it, but they do allow people to say something about themselves, and for a whole lot of people being gay is something they're proud to tell others.

I spoke a little about this in the thread I started, but one of the biggest reasons why I'm coming out now is because the Prop 8 controversy just reminded me of how important it is to be proud of being gay. There have been times in history and there are still places in the world where you can be arrested or even killed for being gay. Even in modern-day America you can still be killed for your orientation. Saying that you're gay isn't about putting up arbitrary personal facts or trying to hook up or something, it's about saying you're unafraid to acknowledge something that others have died for acknowledging.

If you're going to allow people a space to describe themselves briefly, you have to understand that for many people the fact that they're gay is incredibly important to them.

Moonie, I hope you get the chance to gay-marry any gay-dude you want to gay-kiss for the rest of your gay-life. gay. In a few years. We need to squeeze all the straight marriages in that we can, before God decides he's not cool with marriage anymore. You know. Jesus. The Angry One.

Edit: Also, back up.... Saying that a relationship where one of the people is disabled is primarily a sexual relationship is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard.

 

[J. Agamemnon]

well you know, there's complaining and then there's complaining. Skotti you make really good points as does PM who I agree with. Not saying you're wrong but I am saying that you bring up very good valid points that could actually make a damn good case. Maybe even Wade vs Roe good. I mean when you honestly look at it, this has civil rights infringement written all over it. All you would need is some proof and bam. maybe some screenshots of latin lover and them still being active members with no consequences of being banned.

 

[Planet-man]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't make any sense.

What you're saying is

Orientation = A topic of a sexual nature

"Happily married" = (At least in most parts of America) A man in a relationship with a woman = Totally fine[]

The rules say "stand for, hint at, abbreviate, or insinuate or relate to". "Happily married" easily stands for, hints at, abbreviates, or insinuates or relates to the fact that whoever said it is heterosexual.

If the overall U.S. legal definition of marriage (and thus what Microsoft adheres to) is exclusively between a man and a woman, then I can concede to this.

But Skotti's point was still that somebody saying that wouldn't get banned, which she still has absolutely no proof of and so there's still no anti-gay bias on their part.

And besides that, neither statement is really inherently sexual. You can't blame anyone for reading those rules and not thinking that "I'm gay" translates to some kind of intensely explicit sexual statement.

Why can't I? It's stating your sexual orientation. They didn't say it had to be "explicit" or "intense".

Now, as a person I wouldn't immeadiately ban somebody for putting that there, like Microsoft does, but since they say they also do it to people who insist on putting "I'm heterosexual" in their profile too, there is again none of the bias that Skotti is complaining about.

People seem to be saying that they don't want their kids seeing it because they don't want to have to explain to them what being gay is, because this would apparently involve defining sodomy and showing them several hours of gay porn.

[citation needed]

Some boys like girls, some boys like boys, and some girls like girls. It's not just about sex, if it was then anything that even suggests a relationship between two people would be defined as sexual. Mickey and Minnie Mouse's relationship would be "of a sexual nature".

Mickey and Minnie Mouse didn't sign a contract saying they wouldn't reveal that they're homo or heterosexual or be banned from TV.

If none of it's important then they shouldn't allow any of it, but they do allow people to say something about themselves, and for a whole lot of people being gay is something they're proud to tell others.

And for a whole lot of straight people too. Who also are just as not-allowed to say so in their profiles.

So it's not the anti-Gay thing that certain people are making it out to be. They are treating Gays and Straights with entirely equal rights.

Edit:

Edit: Also, back up.... Saying that a relationship where one of the people is disabled is primarily a sexual relationship is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard.

Who said that? What I said is that paralyzed or not, saying "I'm gay" or "I'm straight" still officially refers to your sexual orientation, not who you are in a sexual relationship with.

 

[Gemini]

*walks into thread*

*looks around*

Jeez this is very touchy subject matter, that technically speaking both sides are both wrong and right.

I have to get the hell out of here

*backs out slowly and closes the door quietly*

*goes to shortpacked for some laughter*

 

[Planet-man]

*goes to shortpacked for some laughter*

*bans Gemini*

 

[moonmaster]

Rethinking this a bit...what it comes down to is that though (at least for the moment) there's no concrete proof that the policy is being enforced in a discriminatory manner, it's still an incredibly stupid policy. There's nothing inappropriate about saying that you're gay or married, but I can see why - in a loophole-y way - it could be interpreted that way.

I suppose I don't accuse Microsoft of being homophobic so much as I accuse them of creating a rule that has facilitated homophobia and refusing the change it. It was clear from the way that "Teresa" was hounded that people weren't reporting her because she was breaking the rules, they were using that policy as an excuse to get gay people kicked off of Xbox Live. I don't think the policy was written with this in mind at all, but ignorant people are clearly taking advantage of it.

What Microsoft needs to do is look at the policy and rethink how it's worded. (And according to the original Consumerist article about it that I'm just now seeing, they actually are.)

 

[J. Agamemnon]

Rethinking this a bit...what it comes down to is that though (at least for the moment) there's no concrete proof that the policy is being enforced in a discriminatory manner, it's still an incredibly stupid policy. There's nothing inappropriate about saying that you're gay or married, but I can see why - in a loophole-y way - it could be interpreted that way.

I suppose I don't accuse Microsoft of being homophobic so much as I accuse them of creating a rule that has facilitated homophobia and refusing the change it. It was clear from the way that "Teresa" was hounded that people weren't reporting her because she was breaking the rules, they were using that policy as an excuse to get gay people kicked off of Xbox Live. I don't think the policy was written with this in mind at all, but ignorant people are clearly taking advantage of it.

What Microsoft needs to do is look at the policy and rethink how it's worded. (And according to the original Consumerist article about it that I'm just now seeing, they actually are.)

THe only pro i see to that rule is if they're thinking of younger children 13- bracket. I wouldn't want my 8 year old pwning people on gears of war 5 asking what a gay/lesbian person is because they heard it or saw it on xbox live. I'd like to make that decision for myself. Then again, if it were at all possible, their should be age limits with who you talk to on xbox live. Like they have a recreation and pro channel but no age restrictions as to who you play with? if that were implemented then you could easily do away with such a rule and have it only pertain to the younger brackets.

i mean it's stupid enough that your 10 year old can frag the **** out of a guy and watch him explode to 20 pieces in a bloody, hemmoraging murder yet if their name is even Gay Henderson, that somehow constitutes an account ban?

Regardless, even if these "ignorant" pricks are taking advantage of this, it can just as easily be used the other way around. You got a voice, use it.

 

[Planet-man]

Rethinking this a bit...what it comes down to is that though (at least for the moment) there's no concrete proof that the policy is being enforced in a discriminatory manner, it's still an incredibly stupid policy. There's nothing inappropriate about saying that you're gay or married, but I can see why - in a loophole-y way - it could be interpreted that way.

The result of the policy IS stupid that way, but I can also see it's (for now) probably the easiest way to just ensure there's nothing to do with sex in the profiles - by going extreme zero tolerance.

I suppose I don't accuse Microsoft of being homophobic so much as I accuse them of creating a rule that has facilitated homophobia and refusing the change it. It was clear from the way that "Teresa" was hounded that people weren't reporting her because she was breaking the rules, they were using that policy as an excuse to get gay people kicked off of Xbox Live.

I don't think the policy was written with this in mind at all, but ignorant people are clearly taking advantage of it.

What Microsoft needs to do is look at the policy and rethink how it's worded. (And according to the original Consumerist article about it that I'm just now seeing, they actually are.)

The most sensible solution, I think, would probably just to be having a box in your profile specifically designated for listing sexual orientation - allowing people to express themselves without giving room for baiting or descriptions of lewd acts or whatever people don't want in the network.

However, the only reason to do this in my opinion is to remove the room for the type of abuse Teresa got.

Personally, I still don't really see why the right to tell people you don't know that you're gay/straight in a tiny box of stats in a near-anonymus videogame profile needs to be madated. Why pick this out of all the other customizable things you have access to every day? Why not also only wear shirts that say "I'm gay/straight" on them, and demand it go on your driver's license and every receipt you get when you go to McDonalds? What does this have to do with Xbox LIVE?

 

[Gemini]

*bans Gemini*

Oh **** off.

 

[ProjectX2]

I got banned from playing Mario Kart online because I said I was in love with Bowser.

Sorry, I just wanted to lighten the mood.

 

[moonmaster]

The result of the policy IS stupid that way, but I can also see it's (for now) probably the easiest way to just ensure there's nothing to do with sex in the profiles - by going extreme zero tolerance.

The most sensible solution, I think, would probably just to be having a box in your profile specifically designated for listing sexual orientation - allowing people to express themselves without giving room for baiting or descriptions of lewd acts or whatever people don't want in the network.

However, the only reason to do this in my opinion is to remove the room for the type of abuse Teresa got.

That would be a good compromise, I think.

Personally, I still don't really see why the right to tell people you don't know that you're gay/straight in a tiny box of stats in a near-anonymus videogame profile needs to be madated. Why pick this out of all the other customizable things you have access to every day? Why not also only wear shirts that say "I'm gay/straight" on them, and demand it go on your driver's license and every receipt you get when you go to McDonalds? What does this have to do with Xbox LIVE?

I think I already explained this but I'll say it again: if you give someone a space to talk about themselves personally, many people who are gay will consider stating that they are gay to be something important to mention because they're proud of it.

And some people do wear it on t-shirts.

 

[J. Agamemnon]

I got banned from playing Mario Kart online because I said I was in love with Bowser.

Sorry, I just wanted to lighten the mood.

it's no use. they can't hear you.

 

[Zombipanda]

I got banned from playing Mario Kart online because I said I was in love with Bowser.

Sorry, I just wanted to lighten the mood.

And I got banned from Bruce Springsteen concerts after sending him vaguely homicidal love letters. It's just no fair.

 

[Gemini]

it's no use. they can't hear you.

They could tell because he raced on Rainbow Road as Toad way too much.

 

[moonmaster]

These posts are all of an inappropriate sexual nature and therefore you are all permanently banned from Ultimate Central, forever.

 

[J. Agamemnon]

These posts are all of an inappropriate sexual nature and therefore you are all permanently banned from Ultimate Central, forever.

in that case, we should ban you for setting up that thread...buddy.

 

[Planet-man]

That would be a good compromise, I think.

I think I already explained this but I'll say it again: if you give someone a space to talk about themselves personally, many people who are gay will consider stating that they are gay to be something important to mention because they're proud of it.

And some people do wear it on t-shirts.

It's all starting to add up.:shock:

These posts are all of an inappropriate sexual nature and therefore you are all permanently banned from Ultimate Central, forever.

You're the one whose avatar is some sort of Chinese Laser Vagina.

 

[Zombipanda]

These posts are all of an inappropriate sexual nature and therefore you are all permanently banned from Ultimate Central, forever.

Kiss me, you big strong authority figure.

 

[Gemini]

[Demitri Martin] I want to get a shirt with a rainbow on it, but I don't want to seem gay. I'll have a rainbow, and under it I'll put, 'Not Gay' ... 'But supportive.' How did one group of people get to claim refracted light? Pretty greedy gays.[/Demitri Martin]

 

[moonmaster]

in that case, we should ban you for setting up that thread...buddy.

I will ban myself, after I ban all of you.

It's all starting to add up.:shock:

Yep.

You're the one whose avatar is some sort of Chinese Laser Vagina.

I'm not sure how you got "Chinese Laser Vagina" from my avatar, but I'm now totally starting a band and calling it that.

Kiss me, you big strong authority figure.

Outside of the site, where such sexual content will not offend other members.

[Demitri Martin] I want to get a shirt with a rainbow on it, but I don't want to seem gay. I'll have a rainbow, and under it I'll put, 'Not Gay' ... 'But supportive.' How did one group of people get to claim refracted light? Pretty greedy gays.[/Demitri Martin]

When I saw that, I wished I was straight just so I could make that shirt and wear it. He should sell those on his website or something.