Topic: PKMN.NET and LGBTQ

[Joeno]

Those who keep up with other Pokemon sites may have noticed the actions of others making a stance against LGBTQ discrimination and hatred, explicitly calling it out as not allowed now and creating extra protection.

We're not joining them in this move.

Let me explain. PKMN.NET's admin team has three gay members on it. We're the ones paying for the site, writing the code, and have beyond this done a lot of work on the site. Several other staff members fall in the same group.

So yes, it's in our own best interest to be in favour of it. We're gay, we don't hide it, we're proud of it, and that isn't going to change.

That doesn't mean we like their changes.

My big issue with this is an expansion on this when asked whether this wouldn't simply be covered by flaming. From a staff member on that site:

There were a lot of caveats based on how you phrased your post, where you said it, etc. Special permissions to "allow debates" and to avoid "banning an opinion" and other things like that.

The new policy eliminate the vast majority of those caveats and permissions.

You know what that says? That it isn't there to eliminate the bad behaviour. Other, more general rules can cover this. That protects everyone. Not just those who are LGBTQ, but also those with different religions, skin colour, ethnic background, hair colour and yes, even those who think the word 'forme' is cool rather than ridiculous.

No, this rule is created because apparently we need protecting. We can't stand up for ourselves. We're not firm enough. It needs to be called out specifically and seperately, and be covered by everyone else.

It implies a weakness, a softness, saying that we are. And that's offensive. Singling us out to protect us is as bad as allowing it the opposite way. Censorship is not the way to create understanding or equality, it's a way to make those who are opposed to, for example, LGBTQ rights feel even worse about us. You're silencing them to protect us.

We can do without that. We can take care of ourselves. Ban hate speech if you want, but do it for everyone, not just for the LGBTQ community. Don't make us out to be weak enough that we need it called out specifically. That can be as offensive.

To quote Chelsea Handler (yeah...) on Kathy Griffin's talkshow (yeah...), on something similar:

The more we talk about women being unequal to men, the more it becomes a true statement. I think we should just act like everything is even and it will be.

[Enigma]

^Wasn't sure if I agreed with Jeroen on this or not at first, but upon reading the comments on the Bulbapedia page, I'm definitely coming round.

I'm sure their intentions are good, but it does seem a little specific, especially for something that is technically already covered in their rules.

And as pointed out, it's interesting that they've not made this simply an update, but an actual news update. Seems a bit...eh, bandwagon-y? Self-loving? "Aren't we a nice accepting community?"

I guess that's a good thing, but with all other sites, homophobia doesn't need a special rule, or a special site update to discourage its members from hate-speech.

Also, I think the danger with this sort of out-right banning of hate-speech/opinion, is that it can prevent education of those who are ignorant. Maybe.

Interested to see other people's views on this...

[Stmacl]

So wait... they're introducing a rule that protect's a specific group from being alienated... isn't that kind of an oxymoron? I mean sure they're trying to stop discrimination, that's good... but to invent a rule that specifically states that... isn't this just going to alienate them more?? I think that people aren't going to accept difference overnight, this is going to be something that takes time. As my Mum once said stick them in a room and let them talk it all out. The more peoples freedom to talk about this is taken, the more they'll want to speak about it right??

[Enigma]

So wait... they're introducing a rule that protect's a specific group from being alienated... isn't that kind of an oxymoron? I mean sure they're trying to stop discrimination, that's good... but to invent a rule that specifically states that... isn't this just going to alienate them more?? I think that people aren't going to accept difference overnight, this is going to be something that takes time.

The thing is, most people are generally ok with the LBGT crew anyway, so bringing this rule is doesn't change much - and furthermore, even if people were posting hate for the LGBT crew, the flame rule covers it.

So what's the purpose of making this site-wide update, other than bolstering the confidence of an already egotistical group (don't call me out on this - just look at Pride =P) and deepening the prejudice of h8ers? =P

[Specstile]

Not sure where i stand on this but i do agree, some would say that it's good to put rules up to prevent children learning these bad things in the first place and may internalise the rules for the future. But it still going to happen on and off the internet on other sites so you might as well toughen up as soon as possible /see that you will be descriminated against and learn how to deal with it.

[Turner]

Nice. I don't think I've ever seen a people make an issue of it here, and I definitely agree with the last quote. In fact upon first glance my mind just automatically started interpreting 'LGBTQ' as a potential Pokemon game acronym.

[Lord Raven]

who's the third gay member

[Sebastian Moran]

Yes good. Seeing as a lot of the places on the Internet in which these take place don't have an issue with it anyway, it does seem a bit "preaching to the choir"..y. Not just on these sites (which tbh I hadn't seen until just now) but on the Internet in general. 
 
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I'll assume that everyone's OK with queer people (for example) until proven otherwise, rather than assuming that everyone's hateful until i see a news update/banner on their site. 
but uh, yeah. It does smack a bit of "...wait, so you weren't pro-LGBTQ before?" 
 

[Trainer Dave]

I'll agree on this one - I can't say I've seen any discrimination or prejudice on this form, so change isn't all that necessary - especially when it comes to censorship.

I don't know about everyone else, but I don't see a "gay admin" and a "straight admin". The same goes for normal members. They're just regular people and I couldn't care less about everyone's sexuality.

Perhaps it may be linked to us being an EU site, mind you. I understand that the US has far larger problems with such prejudice.

[Joeno]

who's the third gay member

The three gay admins are Typhlosion, Mulholland and myself.

Unless our secret mind control changing sexuality powers converted someone else as well. Just never had those work. We're rubbish at those things.

[Turner]

I think a lot of people also forget there's been a lot of progress made in the past few years with regards to tolerance to LGBTQ, I've never had a problem with it but I remember when I was in my early years of school it definitely wasn't as accepted as it is now. When I joined this place almost 8 years ago I didn't know anyone who claimed to be gay in real life and it wasn't until I went on the IRC that I'd ever interacted with people who were open and proud about it.

That's not to say I would have been some kind of gay basher without it (Kind of hard to be where I live), but I definitely think the small, casual amounts of exposure on this site made me much more aware of the fact and I'm sure there are other members who are in a similar position, whether they realise it or not.

[Mulholland]

I know it's weird that Joeno included a Chelsea Handler quote but I insisted he did because to me it summed everything up.

Whilst Bulbagarden had good intentions in many ways it just feels patronising. If this site made a news item saying we are now taking a pro-black or pro-jewish stance it would just look terrible...

[f3raligatr]

The three gay admins are Typhlosion, Mulholland and myself.

Unless our secret mind control changing sexuality powers converted someone else as well. Just never had those work. We're rubbish at those things.

... You mean you've tried?

[Lord Raven]

Perhaps it may be linked to us being an EU site, mind you. I understand that the US has far larger problems with such prejudice.

nope we are just a bigger country that allows the idiots to get on tv faaaaaaaaaaaaar too much

ie, i dont appreciate remarks like that about a country you don't even live in

The three gay admins are Typhlosion, Mulholland and myself.

o lol, i thought like rex or rob came out of the closet or something, i would've been super blown then

[Trainer Dave]

nope we are just a bigger country that allows the idiots to get on tv faaaaaaaaaaaaar too much

ie, i dont appreciate remarks like that about a country you don't even live in

True, it's a larger country, and you get idiots everywhere. However, I was genuinely shocked recently to find out that North Carolina had passed legislation to outlaw same-sex unions altogether (Plus it's not the only state to do so). This comes at the same time as public opinion over here is largely moving towards legalising gay marriage. I understand that these scenarios may be isolated to certain parts of the US, but as a country on the whole it still suggests that discrimination and prejudice against the homosexual population is a problem.

i.e. I wouldn't consider my comment baseless.