• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Games Database
  • Game Discovery
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Forums
continue reading below

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Other → Chit Chat → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

cassa2419DCastKarlokVegetable Party

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Should support of an artist be influenced by their beliefs/attitudes?

Avatar

Total Posts: 1289

Joined 2012-07-15

PM

Quest1 - 05 June 2013 07:49 AM

  Why not remove the requirement that it involves pairs. Why not end discrimination against polyamorous people?


Yes, why not? It’s not my thing, but if all parties involved wants it, I don’t see why you or I should tell them they can’t be more than a pair in a marriage. Anyway, it’s a bad comparison as being “polyamorous” is a choice. Being gay isn’t.

Gender roles have been very important to marriage.

What does that even mean?

     

Duckman: Can you believe it? Five hundred bucks for a parking ticket?
Cornfed Pig: You parked in a handicapped zone.
Duckman: Who cares? Nobody parks there anyway, except for the people who are supposed to park there and, hell, I can outrun them anytime.

Total Posts: 7

Joined 2006-06-20

PM

Interesting discussion. Let me make a short detour. One of my country’s greatest writer, perhaps the greatest! was clearly a racist. He meant (the writer is Called Johannes V. Jensen) that white shouldn’t marry black people, although some mixing of the races was OK.
Another topic we’ve discussed in Denmark - and in Sweden is this. Tintin - political correct or not. Especially the album Tintin in Africa. And should Hergé‘s whole career be based solely on this album….No, of course not.

Let me them move on this discussion. The question that I can see asked is this: should we support an artist financially if we don’t share their views/beliefs? Or more to the point? Should we let support of an artist be influenced by their beliefs/views/attitudes which I’ll then translate/interpretate as this: —- if we don’t share the same views as the artist does? E.g. if the author is a known communist, fascist or impererialist should we still buy their work - regardless of whether it is books, movies, plays or computergames.

My stance on this is very clear. I don’t want to support any games from Wadjet Eye Games and the creator of the Shivah. I’ve played the all three endings in The Shivah game - and seems to clear me that the message in the game is one I personally find offensive, thus I’ve decided to not buy any games from the mand behind the Shivah, and from Wadjet Eye Games. If other people want to buy games from Wadjet Eye Games, so be it…It is their decision to do so…

As for Bioware games, I buy them, for their story, but also because I want to support Bioware in their quest to have relationsships in games (with romance scenes). I don’t buy wargames (or rarely buy), but those I buy usually just end up sitting on the shelf for a very, very long time. [I have bought all the FEAR games, though…] And are planning to buy Bioshcok Infinite as well (have the other two games in the series as well). Do I care about what the developers do and say in interviews when they present the game. Of course, I do. And of course, I don’t. If a game is good, I’ll buy it. Sometimes regardless of what
the developers say - sometimes because I think they’ve said some very relevant things. Like Ken Levine did when the first Bioshock game came out. (re Little Sisters and Harvest etc.)

Let me try asking you another question - kind of the same question as the one being asked in this thread, but up another alley, (or should that be street?) maybe. Here’s the question: If you had a favorite actor or actress for say 10 or even 20 years, and one day it was revealed that he/she was homosexual. Would you then say that all his/her movies was not worth watching anymore. I wouldn’t…would you….

 

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 8166

Joined 2011-10-21

PM

Mister Ed -

If (as one possible example) it has something to do with providing the public a benefit by encouraging stability in families as they raise children, then it would suggest that the reasoning DOESN’T apply equally, as heterosexual pairings are FAR more likely to involve children. But even if that is the case, one could certainly argue that that reasoning is faulty, due to the divorce rate, or the fact that many marriages don’t produce children, or that some homosexual families DO include children, so that for that reasoning to be applied fairly it would hinge on whether children were present. In any case, I think it more appropriate to make a case from a standpoint of fairness in the offering of said benefits, rather than appealing to some “basic human right”.

Actually, in my immediate surroundings, there’s a higher percentage of homosexual pairings with children (either adopted or via IVF) than heterosexual pairings with children.
But the government-issued benefits to marriage are minimal to non-existant here, anyway, so allowing same-sex marriage was a no-brainer here. Very little opposition, really, contrary to what we’re seeing in France now.

The second issue is societal acceptance of same-sex relationships as equivalent to opposite sex ones. That goal is not, I think, going to be achieved by governmental decree. If same-sex marriage became the law of the land tomorrow, it would do nothing to change the minds of anybody that does not currently feel like it IS the same as traditional marriage. No, changing that view is, if it happens (as seems likely at this point) going to be an ongoing process of persuasion.

I disagree. The societal acceptance isn’t going to be achieved by governmental decree overnight, but it will help to slowly chip away at the opposition, and (more or less) full societal acceptance will be achieved slightly faster by it.
Which is as it should be, imo.


As for other points raised in the threads, I mostly follow millenia’s voice of reason.


If you think an artist’s beliefs or general attitude are offensive, then it’s still your choice to support his/her art or not.

Personally, if his/her political/religious/whatever viewpoints that I severely disagree with don’t find a way into the art itself, then I see no reason not to support them. But I won’t take offense if someone else DOES find that a reason to not support them.
I’d only take offense if they actually started undermining the art (and even campaigning against it) because of the artist. There’s always room for argumentation and discussion, but there should never be any room for pure hate. No matter how extreme the differences of opinion may be, there’s NEVER a need to break out the torches and pitch forks…

     

Last played: Oknytt (CPT) - 2.5/5 | Horizon: Zero Dawn - 4/5 | Marvel’s Spider-Man - 4.5/5 | Freddi Fish 3: The Case of the Stolen Conch Shell - 3/5 | There Is No Game: Wrong Dimension (CPT) - 4/5 | There Is No Game (replay) - 4/5 | Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars (replay) - 3/5 | Lighthouse: The Dark Being (CPT) - 2.5/5 | Anna’s Quest (CPT) - 4.5/5 | Simon the Sorcerer II: The Lion, the Wizard and the Wardrobe - 4/5 | Florence - 4/5 | Alice Trapped in Wonderland - 1/5 | The Hunt for the Lost Ship - 1.5/5 | The Talos Principle - 4/5 | Tex Murphy: Martian Memorandum - 3/5 | Danganronpa: Trigger Happy Havoc - 3/5 | Simon the Sorcerer (replay) - 4/5 | Portal 2 - 4/5 | Murder By Numbers - 3.5/5 | Heavy Rain - 3.5/5 | Disco Elysium - 4.5/5

Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

I’ve been following this thread with interest & done some soul searching!

I’ve read most of TenNapal’s Blogs & Twitters - he comes across as a very talented writer, devoted to his family with a lot of enthusiasm about making a new game with a lot of focus on that! Intertwined & a minor part of his postings are a few of his views - I didn’t glean any hostility on his part so I can’t help thinking that this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill as far as he’s concerned!

BTW my view is that you live your life the way that is right for you as long as you don’t hurt anyone else & I’m glad that laws are coming in to make that easier!

But it is a thought-provoking thread & thinking about it I would buy any form of media production that I thought would interest me regardless of whether I agreed with the producers political sway, provided that the production wasn’t a campaign for a controversial cause that I didn’t agree with, and/or any revenue from sales would be used for it - I don’t think making AGs is a problem there!

I’m all for controversial issues being a subject of a game as long as it’s presented well & a counter argument included if the views are extreme.

aries323 - 05 June 2013 11:27 AM


My stance on this is very clear. I don’t want to support any games from Wadjet Eye Games and the creator of the Shivah. I’ve played the all three endings in The Shivah game - and seems to clear me that the message in the game is one I personally find offensive, thus I’ve decided to not buy any games from the mand behind the Shivah, and from Wadjet Eye Games. If other people want to buy games from Wadjet Eye Games, so be it…It is their decision to do so…

aries, I played this game many years ago - it’s very short but despite the basic graphics found it very engaging, witty & funny! If there was a message in it what was it that leads you not to support any of the other games from WadgetEye?

aries323 - 05 June 2013 11:27 AM


If you had a favorite actor or actress for say 10 or even 20 years, and one day it was revealed that he/she was homosexual. Would you then say that all his/her movies was not worth watching anymore. I wouldn’t…would you….

Well no - actors & actresses play a role & their private lives are irrelevant unless you have a crush on a particular actor/actress where it can totally crush your fantasy!!! I’ve never had a problem with actor/actresses ‘coming out’ but I have to confess I was very upset when Legolas eventually ‘shacked-up’ with Gimli in Lord of the Rings - oh shucks!

     

Total Posts: 10

Joined 2011-02-18

PM

I have a totally unrelated question: should support of an artist be influenced by whether or not he’s showing support himself (and by support I don’t mean just verbal support for gay marriages)?

One of these 8 backed projects happens to be DF’s second project, Massive Chalice. I’m sorry for derailing the thread like this, but with the amount of bashing TenNapel receives on these forums it was hard to resist.

And this time actually on topic:

In the heat of debate, I was asked why I’m against two men getting married. Once that question is asked, there’s no way to answer it without offending the people on one side or the other. I answered that I was against it for the same reason I was against a man using the ladies room. I used the term, “taking a dump in the ladies room.” A coarse phrase that nobody should tolerate, but given I was already in a conversation where “homophobic”, “Bigot” and “Nazi” are regularly thrown around, it was obvious to me that concern for being offended had long left the building.

I’ll let your readers decide if my comment is the new N-word, but to cut that post and paste it on a gay site out of context is one of the more offensive assaults I’ve seen of recent. If you argue against Israel on the Palestine/Israeli conflict and then I copy the worst of your comments about the Jews being oppressive then post them on some conservative synagogue’s site, does that say more about you or me? Are you trying to enlighten Jews or set the place on fire? It doesn’t excuse my blunt response, but the people I debate with don’t appear to have a problem with bluntness, or even using deliberately offensive terms, they have a problem that I think marriage should continue to be defined as one man and one woman.

http://popzara.com/pages/1784/

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 7110

Joined 2005-09-29

PM

Dag - 05 June 2013 06:49 AM

The term “marriage” has been around for much longer than we have, so one can only assume that the meaning of the word was being defined in a time where homosexuality was treated as a sick perversion, so maybe it’s about time to loosen the definition a bit? Being gay is not a choice, it’s not a phase, it’s not a rebellion, and making laws which in effect only serves to making their lives more difficult isn’t gonna make them go away, it’s just gonna make them feel less valuable as human beings, and that is, no matter what some people have convinced themselves, discrimination.

 


Change the word for same sex marraige as the root meaning (quick googling) of Marraige contains elements of mother,female and male combo which looks contradictory with gay marraige, some new word for ‘contract’ could be made.


I also want to know what Shivah did wrong, i didn’t find it offensive, what did i miss?

 

Also, Quest1, you are just wrong about everything you say regarding marriage, and history will bury you and that opinion you espouse.


Creating Memoryholes ain’t always about logic its about power play.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

I’m in possession of a few Gary Glitter records bought at the height of his fame & before it was known that he was a paedophile (that’s something that really appals me) - they were good catchy tunes at the time & they still are but I wouldn’t have supported him by buying them knowing what I know now so I guess I do have a limit!

     

Total Posts: 247

Joined 2012-05-21

PM

chrissie - 05 June 2013 03:03 PM

I’m in possession of a few Gary Glitter records bought at the height of his fame & before it was known that he was a paedophile (that’s something that really appals me) - they were good catchy tunes at the time & they still are but I wouldn’t have supported him by buying them knowing what I know now so I guess I do have a limit!

This is a good example of where I think I draw the line. If somebody expresses views that I disagree with, even vehemently disagree with, I don’t have a problem with supporting their art so long as said art doesn’t actually express those same views. But when the person is involved in something criminal, or at least that I see as very unethical, then I’m not inclined to support them regardless of whether their art has anything to do with those criminal acts.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 359

Joined 2012-02-16

PM

Like chrissie, I’ve also followed the thread with interest, struggling to formulate an honest answer. My initial reaction to TenNapel’s ideas and my feelings about The Neverhood do not generalize easily to artists whose work I enjoy and who happen to hold abhorrent views (Lovecraft, say).

One little thing I wanted to point out is the nuances in the different forms of support - ranging from a pure market transaction (I buy a physical recording of your music, say) to (the largely obsolete) patron-client relationship (I pay you a salary because I like your music and want to be able to enjoy more of it). It is clear that the different definitions of “support” imply different answers to the thread’s question. The thing here is that a Kickstarter is right in the middle between those two, which further complicates matters.

Mister Ed - 05 June 2013 04:03 PM

If somebody expresses views that I disagree with, even vehemently disagree with, I don’t have a problem with supporting their art so long as said art doesn’t actually express those same views. But when the person is involved in something criminal, or at least that I see as very unethical, then I’m not inclined to support them regardless of whether their art has anything to do with those criminal acts.

So you draw the line between speech and actions? I find that to be very unsatisfying. Because: how is speech defined? If I were anti-gay and incited people to perpetrate hate crimes against gay people, is that speech or actions? More realistically, what if I taught my kids (as I suspect TenNapel does) to perceive gay people as inferior, unnatural, perverted, and undeserving of rights equal to straight people (thus likely affecting their future actions)?

Anyway, I don’t want to pick on you, Mister Ed. This is just to highlight that speech and actions aren’t so easily separated, and that speech can have very tangible effects just as actions can. Speech can wound, speech can bully, speech can influence someone to take an action etc.

 

     

Total Posts: 247

Joined 2012-05-21

PM

If somebody directly encourages criminal actions through their speech, I would consider that to rise to the level of triggering my negative reaction. But I do not hold somebody that holds a view responsible for the actions of another that holds the same view, even if their expression of that view was claimed as an influence by the one that acted inappropriately on it.

So if, for example, somebody told people to go bomb churches (or whatever), I would consider that to be over the line, and criminal. But is somebody simply stated that they believed some religion (or some other thing) to be wrong, I would not hold them responsible for somebody else that, claiming that view as an influence/explanation, then went out and bombed a church.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 473

Joined 2008-01-09

PM

aries323 - 05 June 2013 11:27 AM

My stance on this is very clear. I don’t want to support any games from Wadjet Eye Games and the creator of the Shivah. I’ve played the all three endings in The Shivah game - and seems to clear me that the message in the game is one I personally find offensive, thus I’ve decided to not buy any games from the mand behind the Shivah, and from Wadjet Eye Games. If other people want to buy games from Wadjet Eye Games, so be it…It is their decision to do so…

I am curious as well as to the offensive nature, but I’ll respect your privacy as well.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 358

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

chrissie - 05 June 2013 03:03 PM

I’m in possession of a few Gary Glitter records bought at the height of his fame & before it was known that he was a paedophile (that’s something that really appals me) - they were good catchy tunes at the time & they still are but I wouldn’t have supported him by buying them knowing what I know now so I guess I do have a limit!

Yep, and I want nothing to do with Michael Jackson material. There is no doubt in my mind that he was a child-molesting pedophile. Especially not after this:

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 358

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

TerminusEst - 05 June 2013 06:07 PM

More realistically, if I taught my kids (as I suspect TenNapel does) to perceive gay people as inferior, unnatural, perverted, and undeserving of rights equal to straight people (thus likely affecting their future actions)?

Wow, TenNapel never suggested anything of the sort. In fact, he has gone out of his way to emphasize that he believes everyone retains their human dignity and should be treated with respect.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 359

Joined 2012-02-16

PM

Quest1 - 05 June 2013 08:31 PM
TerminusEst - 05 June 2013 06:07 PM

More realistically, if I taught my kids (as I suspect TenNapel does) to perceive gay people as inferior, unnatural, perverted, and undeserving of rights equal to straight people (thus likely affecting their future actions)?

Wow, TenNapel never suggested anything of the sort. In fact, he has gone out of his way to emphasize that he believes everyone retains their human dignity and should be treated with respect.

No, he never used those words. The first (inferior) and last (unequal rights) follow directly from his belief that gay people shouldn’t be able to marry. The “unnatural” and “perverted” are only very likely given the (level of) religious beliefs he so openly advertises.

None of those need to contradict his magnanimous acceptance of gays’ right to retain their human dignity or whatever (as long as they do not pollute our marriage, of course, the scoundrels!). And, in any case, we need to be able to differentiate between one’s private beliefs (i.e. what one teaches his/her children) and what one says in public (and then, potentially, erases).

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 358

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

TerminusEst - 05 June 2013 08:55 PM

And, in any case, we need to be able to differentiate between one’s private beliefs (i.e. what one teaches his/her children) and what one says in public (and then, potentially, erases).

We also need to be careful about making up and speculating about, in the context of talking about people who incite anti-gay hate and violence, what someone may or may not teach their children in private. To assume that TenNapel, or anyone else who believes in marriage tradition or is a Christian, goes out of his way to privately demean gays in particular and then pretends differently in public is a pretty nasty, shameful thing to say. Shame on you.

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Other → Chit Chat → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!

Back to the top