Hypothetical: Legacy flavour text?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Emphasis mine.

You cannot possibly be serious.

Plus, I'm not concerned with transmisogyny. At all. The truly offensive part of the poem is its attitude towards the newcomer to homosexual behavior.

Of course I can be serious.

As regards your concerns, that's an excellent case in point. That's what you read into it, and what is offensive TO YOU.

What caused the complaint in the first place with the limerick in Pillars of Eternity was a claim of tranmisogyny, which is what the person who made the complaint read into it and found truly offensive. That person was just as sure as you are, that what he read into it was what it was all about.

As I said - it is a limerick that can be read and interpreted in many different ways, and the way that is obvious to you is not necessarily obvious to others.

"

DirkAustin wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Pi2rEpsilon wrote:

Well, it is pretty simple.

Story is of a man who is a womanizer, who sleeps with somebody whom he thinks a woman, and upon discovering it isn't is ashamed and runs off a cliff and dies. And it is presented as a limerick.

What it is not, is a story mocking people who are transgender.

There is absolutely nothing in the story that enjoins the reader to sympathise with the womanizer, think that he is right to be ashamed, or think that his reaction is reasonable. There is also nothing explaining why he made the mistake of thinking the man was a woman - nor is there anything to say that his second identification was any better than his first identification of his sleeping partner.

Emphasis mine.

You cannot possibly be serious.

Plus, I'm not concerned with transmisogyny. At all. The truly offensive part of the poem is its attitude towards the newcomer to homosexual behavior.

It was about a transgender woman in the flavor text, not a homosexual man. And it would have been fine if not for the suicidal part at the end.

sigh

Here's the plot: previously straight man accidentally partakes in homosexual behavior. Kills self in shame.

If you can't spot at least two homosexual men in thus story, you need to learn to count.

I was assuming a man in drag (posing as a woman), not, well, an actual woman. I also believe this is the most historically accurate way to interpret the text, as sex-change is a very recent development which wouldn't generally be possible in a setting where swords are weapons. Furthermore, if you assume shapeshifting wizard or some similar trickery, the gender identity of the "woman" becomes pretty confusing, without a modern equivalent.

None of this is core. The central conflict is a man's shame over having sex with another person he identifies as male. (I'm not saying it, he is.) Whether the "woman" is or is not factually woman is interesting but ultimately irrelevant.

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Idioticus wrote:

What is it with people and their extreme ideological polarization?
Me pointing out that the 50's were not as bad as dirk lays it out to be does not mean I am saying there was no racism or homophobia in that era at all.

You're also downplaying just how bad it was. Say what you said to ANY black American who has even the slightest, most tenuous grasp of history, and tell me exactly how that situation turns out for you.

If in your mind saying that the 50's were not as racist and homophobic as humanly possible is downplaying how bad it was, you must really think it in fact was as racist and homophobic as humanly possible. This is absolutely absurd.

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Idioticus wrote:

In any case, the direction we're heading right now regarding freedom of speech and political correctness and whatnot, can be condensed into this quote from someone whose name I can't remember:
"The fascists of tomorrow are going to be the ones who claim to be anti-fascism".

The combination of words that hold the least bit of power (amounting to exactly none) in an argument are "I am offended".

You also need to understand that there is a difference between offensive ideas and offended people. No one (who doesn't live in the margins of society) would argue that the N-bomb is not an absolutely offensive concept.

You are also, almost certainly saying all this from a position of privilege. You are not a trans person, you do not suffer the constant, socially-accepted barrage of jokes and harassment directed at your very existence. You have a practically nil chance of being the butt of a joke in which the very idea of touching you is worthy of suicide, because of your class.

What does being a trans person have anything to do with this?

"

Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed.
He once was alive, but now he’s dead.
The last woman he bedded, turned out a man
And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran.

He thought a man was a woman. It is a very common joke that a man wakes up next to another man or some beastly woman after a night of drugs/alcohol/whatever.
A heterosexual man who isn't a homophobe, would be extremely distraught after finding out they had sex with another man.

Furthermore, are you a trans person, or do you find actual trans people too weak to defend themselves?
If you aren't a trans person (and a man) would you be completely OK with bedding another man who you for one reason or another considered a woman? And if you are a trans person, you're OK with bedding anyone?

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Idioticus wrote:

If the only thing you want to accomplish by being "offended" is to silence the "offender", you're not only harming freedom of expression, but you're creating an atmosphere where everyone's an offender, and the real racists and whatever gain ground.

If your speech is so vulgar that the only defense you have is "well, it's not technically illegal!", you seriously need to examine what freedom of speech means to you.

And if you're of the mindset that speech is just speech, and harms no one... Please, PLEASE study history. Emphasis on civil rights.

Speech is just speech and harms no one unless it is specifically promoting a certain agenda, in which case it could be hate speech. I already pointed this out.

People got offended by something that has nothing to do with gay people, trans people, etc. The joke is ancient and is not promoting any agenda. It is pointing out a fact that heterosexual men don't want to have sexual intercourse with other men.

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed.
He once was alive, but now he’s dead.
The last woman he bedded, turned out black
And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran.

...still ok with it?

It's easy to dismiss trans issues, because its all so new to us western folk. Doesn't make it any less valid.

There's still no "trans issue", much like there isn't a "patriarchy issue" in that limerick.

"

Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed.
He once was alive, but now he’s dead.
The last woman he bedded, turned out hideous
And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran.

This is the same joke as the original. People don't like to have sexual intercourse people they don't find attractive.

You are forcefully trying to find an issue in something where there is none. This is a clear case of "offended people", which is something that everyone can do.

If being offended has any value, no one would be able to say anything.
Unless you are lying about someone with the intent to cause harm, how can anyone say words are bad?

I'll have more time to read more of this thread tomorrow (possibly) so for now, this'll have to do.

"

DirkAustin wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

DirkAustin wrote:

It was about a transgender woman in the flavor text, not a homosexual man. And it would have been fine if not for the suicidal part at the end.

sigh

Here's the plot: previously straight man accidentally partakes in homosexual behavior. Kills self in shame.

If you can't spot at least two homosexual men in thus story, you need to learn to count.

Im sorry, did we read the same flavor text? Man sleeps with woman who was born a man. Therefore, its a man who slept with a woman, not a man who had sex with a man. or are you saying a transgender woman = man? In that case we have more transphobia on this forum than just in that other POE.

I think he just meant that he/she/whatever was a crossdresser, and not an actual transgender woman, as it wouldn't be possible for that person to get required surgeries and hormone treatment in medieval~ish magical fantasy realm.

"

Idioticus wrote:

wow, much logic

Edit: nah. Apt username is apt.

"

Idioticus wrote:

It is a very common joke that a man wakes up next to another man or some beastly woman after a night of drugs/alcohol/whatever.
A heterosexual man who isn't a homophobe, would be extremely distraught after finding out they had sex with another man.

Former President George H.W. Bush awakes with a groan. The previous night is a blur. Who does he think he is? His son?

He strains past the throbbing in his head to sit up in bed. Unusual specs of green pepper the fog of his vision. As focus comes, apprehension builds. In a matter of seconds, there can be no denying it.

Half-eaten broccoli. Half-eaten broccoli everywhere.

"Oh my God," George whispers to himself, "what if I actually enjoyed it?"

...

That is how silly you sound to me.