Hey, I liked Drake. He's an TRIBBLE, yes but I like him. Did like Ramir as well.
Especially since how quickly Ramir NOPE'd us the hell outta here.
I seriously can't get over that, it's like the person that wrote her lines didn't think about the rammifications at all. I get that she's no engineer and doesn't know much about theoretical physics about transdimensional particles like omega originaly was before it was first discovered but seriously? a military officer like her should at least understand the basic concepts of "being found and having to fight versus instant death" :T instead of insulting you for making that decision.
ktamradio If you are looking for some nice music while playing clicky clicky click!
If you are unhappy about others being unhappy about the lesbians, you can disagree but be civil and respectful.
Please do not interpret the following as an attempt to disagree with a moderation decision. Your warnings and appeals to the ToS are not in question here, and I am not defending the flaming or outright Godwinning taking place in this thread. I would like to address the question of what is an appropriate response to bigotry.
There are two ways to deal with bigots, and which way is appropriate depends on whether or not they are reachable.
The first, most ideal way is to educate them. And for many, simple arguments based on appeals to decency and common ground will work. Often they just need to have the impact of their actions brought home in a personal way--they can't or won't see the problem until it affects them or their immediate family, which is why you see so many conservative politicians or public figures have a sudden change of heart when an issue affects their family.
But it is a fact that there are also many who cannot be reached. Regardless of how they say they feel about homosexuality, their actual behavior is informed by a deeply-entrenched animus that they may or may not admit exists. They do not accept that there is any problem with their behavior, and are not interested in accepting new information or evolving their attitudes on this subject.
This second sort can usually be identified pretty quickly by their sneering contempt towards "equality" or "social justice". People like this aren't ignorant of the fact that they're being offensive. They're proud of it, and view their resistance to civil rights as a brave stand against oppression that is somehow not bigotry because it involves TRIBBLE people and because reasons.
These people can and should be shamed. Not for all eternity; I'm not talking about making them wear a scarlet letter or any inane nonsense like that. But in direct response to specific behaviors. When they unapologetically behave in an offensive and bigoted way, the appropriate response--the only response that has ever worked for dealing with the unreachable holdouts of bigotry, in the long term--is social opprobrium.
In other words, the unified disapproval of society.
The purpose of this kind of response is not to educate--attempting to do so is a waste of everyone's time; they are not going to change their beliefs. The purpose is to reduce the bigot's overall harm to society by conditioning them to expect hostility and strong pushback whenever they behave offensively towards others and ought to know better. They need to be made to understand that actions have consequences, and that while they are free to believe whatever they like, they will be isolated and shunned if they cannot learn to refrain from behaving offensively in public.
That disapproval can be civil, in the sense that it need not include gratuitous insults. But by definition it is direct and devoid of respect, which can be misinterpreted as uncivil.
Fleet Admiral L'Yern - Screenshot and doffing addict
Eclipse Class Intel Cruiser U.S.S. Dioscuria NX-91121-A - Interactive Crew Roster
Especially since how quickly Ramir NOPE'd us the hell outta here.
I seriously can't get over that, it's like the person that wrote her lines didn't think about the rammifications at all. I get that she's no engineer and doesn't know much about theoretical physics about transdimensional particles like omega originaly was before it was first discovered but seriously? a military officer like her should at least understand the basic concepts of "being found and having to fight versus instant death" :T instead of insulting you for making that decision.
Actually it makes sense for her to think that way. She understand combat and knows that the longer the team is in the base, the combat-related risks go up. By that time she had already thought it over and decided that the overall risk was acceptable and planned for it only for your character to come in and decide to change the numbers. Being overprotective couple with it being a last-minute change, it may have increased her views of the personal casualty risk to become significantly higher than the 7% risk the particles offered.
These people can and should be shamed. Not for all eternity; I'm not talking about making them wear a scarlet letter or any inane nonsense like that. But in direct response to specific behaviors.
last i checked, shaming is against the tos in here. i suggest you don't encourage people to break these rules and risk getting banned.
your entire post reads as toxic, inflamatory flame bait, riling people up to continue being bigots to each other, no matter if they're progressives or conservatives.
Now clowns, that's another story. They scare the crap out of me.
We fight them too. Entire armies spilling out of Volkswagens.
We do our best to fight them off, but they keep sending them in.
I feel that in their attempt to be politically correct, Cryptic not only invited controversy they also distracted and detracted from the story they were trying to tell. The death of Kahless at the hands of the Iconians.
I personally feel the death of Khaless was pointless and clunkily written. The fact that the discussion completely ignores this plot point seem to proof I'm not alone with that notion. If anybody feels "distracted" by the TRIBBLE Klingons it's their personal problem - what's distracting in case of this episode is the overall writing.
I feel they also showed a lack of respect for the fact that the game is played by children as well as adults (rated T!) and this was an inappropriate subject to casually toss in.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion. But how is that scene "inappropriate for children" in a game which consists, up to that point, 98% of killing?
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Ignoring that, a game where there's constant violence up to and including completely disintegrating people and killing up to thousands of people every time you blow up a space ship is fine and dandy but acknowledging that two people are a couple is not?
Yes. People, especially children, deal with violent themes differently from how they deal with sexual ones. It doesn't matter if that's cultural or biological or if you think it's fair. It's just true.
The fact that this discussion even exists is sufficient to prove the material is inappropriate for this venue. It's a mature theme that doesn't belong in material marketed for children. Again, it doesn't matter if you think that's fair or the way things should be; it's just true. We're not there yet.
@Venture-1. @Venture from City of Heroes if you remember that. Yes, that Venture. Yes, I probably trashed your MA arc. You'll have to be specific; for me it was Tuesday.
your entire post reads as toxic, inflamatory flame bait, riling people up to continue being bigots to each other, no matter if they're progressives or conservatives.
If that is your interpretation, I can only suggest that you read it more carefully and refrain from manufacturing an intent or meaning that does not exist in what I wrote. I think there is value in examining the appropriate response to unapologetic bigotry.
Fleet Admiral L'Yern - Screenshot and doffing addict
Eclipse Class Intel Cruiser U.S.S. Dioscuria NX-91121-A - Interactive Crew Roster
It was a mistake to go along with the "shaming" language. It was lazy on my part to allow it and it really has nothing to do with what is going on. But a good semantic victory for some.
I recall a scene in Philadelphia where Tom Hanks character was considering coming out to his bosses when he overhears them telling a TRIBBLE joke in the locker room. To the men making this joke it is nothing, but to Hanks it was devastating and told him all he needed to know.
So when Cryptic puts this scenario in the game. How can they not foresee someone coming in with cries of deviancy, think of the children, etc etc etc. Now, to the majority these words are nothing. But to those who have lost everything in life because of them. Well, telling them to be happy with hearing it here in the forum - well it doesn't sit well with me. No. Not one bit.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
I feel they also showed a lack of respect for the fact that the game is played by children as well as adults (rated T!) and this was an inappropriate subject to casually toss in.
i would agree wholeheartedly but then i would be something of a hypocrite for failing to point out;
1. the lockbox system, that preys kids primarily who do not understand the risks of paying money into these things, yes there is the closed loop way of getting the end product but kids dont understand what money is and what patience and planning is about at their age.. and yet these are still common practice.
2. the risa event is a big one because of the amount of exposure of a virtual body on display its almost adult rated, almost pornographic. and then you got the orion females as well in their metal bikini. again kids play this despite the rating.
these are not the only issues either as examples, there are more and if i agreed to what you are getting at i would be ignoring all that. there are a lot of inappropriate topics and things thrown into this game that goes beyond the rating that is inappropriate.
but from the way i see it, if you expose children to certain inappropriate topics instead of hiding it and having to form their own opinions, good, bad or indifferent. you could help them understand as they grow up instead by showing them what is out there before they can fully form that opinion. i cant state if its a good choice or not, i dont have kids of my own but thats another example of a flawed opinion.
i dont agree with the hand holding culture or it reaching the game but yet even i disagree with a few things, one of them primary above others is the generalized casual greed the system is based on in value for virtual goods, but thats a dead issue so i dont bother with it and that includes the above, the lockbox system. i think people and kids should be told the dangers of using money on the game and that the in game system can also give you what you want without needing to spend anything just as well, it should be clearly defined as well as tips that could help you decide for or against spending money, while it could be seen as exposing kids to new ideas, however it could also be seen as a way of pad-walling the walls to keep things too safe and restricted.
so then we come back to the point of inappropriate, i would like to agree but i can not.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Yes. People, especially children, deal with violent themes differently from how they deal with sexual ones. It doesn't matter if that's cultural or biological or if you think it's fair. It's just true.
The fact that this discussion even exists is sufficient to prove the material is inappropriate for this venue. It's a mature theme that doesn't belong in material marketed for children. Again, it doesn't matter if you think that's fair or the way things should be; it's just true. We're not there yet.
It shouldn't be a mature theme. It's a person stating she loves another person. Gender is completely irrelevant there and there was no mention of them rutting the sheets.
You would need to ban nearly every cartoon out there if it's not allowed to show couples.
-
Join Starfleet,
Boldly go where no man has gone before,
Meet interesting new species, and Kill them!
(...)
So when Cryptic puts this scenario in the game. How can they not foresee someone coming in with cries of deviancy, think of the children, etc etc etc. Now, to the majority these words are nothing. But to those who have lost everything in life because of them. Well, telling them to be happy with hearing it here in the forum - well it doesn't sit well with me. No. Not one bit.
I am just... devestated, reading the reactions to that episode, considering we are still in a forum largely dedicated to Star Trek. And that, well... *points at signature*
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
There are two ways to deal with bigots, and which way is appropriate depends on whether or not they are reachable.
Who is the bigot here? Some for just questioning some intents of the DEVs in writing this episode or those who are trying to flame/troll? This is still very civil discussion until you interject the "bigot" comment just because some dare to question something that is out of place in an MMO.
There is still freedom of speech in some countries as long as its civil. Respect others as you like to be respected.
Yes. People, especially children, deal with violent themes differently from how they deal with sexual ones. It doesn't matter if that's cultural or biological or if you think it's fair. It's just true.
The fact that this discussion even exists is sufficient to prove the material is inappropriate for this venue. It's a mature theme that doesn't belong in material marketed for children. Again, it doesn't matter if you think that's fair or the way things should be; it's just true. We're not there yet.
I won't argue the topic of who's ready and who's not, but I still fail to see how this is a mature theme. They said they were a TRIBBLE couple, they did NOT give an in depth explanation of what happens in their quarters at night.
It was no different than a heterosexual woman referring to a man as their husband, and should not have set off the explosive reaction it has.
I am just... devestated, reading the reactions to that episode, considering we are still in a forum largely dedicated to Star Trek. And that, well... *points at signature*
It's kind of unfortunate, isn't it? That a universe devoted to diversity and learning about other points of view and cultures and ways of life... has fans that are so afraid of anything of the sort.
Or was it flamebaiting of Trek to include the first inter-racial kiss on television?
Now clowns, that's another story. They scare the crap out of me.
We fight them too. Entire armies spilling out of Volkswagens.
We do our best to fight them off, but they keep sending them in.
I liked the episode; and am happy to see we're getting more episodic content with interesting characters as well as characters from the TV series.
I have to say I wish they hadn't killed off the Khaless character (but as he was a clone I guess Koloth could clone him again.) :eek::D;)
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I have to say I am deeply disappointed in some of the responses with regard to the female Klingons here, but I can say one thing:
I play this game every day with my children. EVERY. DAY.
One is 10. One is 14. In no way shape or form have they in any way been damaged by exposure to those "horrible" Klesbians. In my honest opinion, most of those screaming "think of the children" and claiming that it is some kind of mature content probably don't have kids.
The only people who get worked up over something like that are people with prejudices deeply ingrained in them. No one is forcing YOU to be TRIBBLE by being TRIBBLE. No one is forcing YOU to have homosexual relationships just because they are. And the reality is, people of all sexual orientations exist and have exactly the same rights as you do, especially in the Star Trek universe.
During the mission, the situation evoked little more than a double take on all of our parts. It wasn't shocking and it didn't require us to stop and have an extended discussion of the facts of life. There were definitely flaws in the writing of the mission (although I did enjoy it) but the casual reference to the same-sex couple was, in my opinion, just right. Nothing forced or overly politically correct, just a matter-of-fact "this is how they are" which is exactly where anything to do with sexual orientation should be, in STO or in the real world.
I am just... devestated, reading the reactions to that episode, considering we are still in a forum largely dedicated to Star Trek. And that, well... *points at signature*
I have noticed over the years here a small minority who ignore the Trek philosophy so that they can keep on enjoying a space fantasy experience. There is a powerful cognitive disssonance inherent to that so it is crucial to keep one's eyes closed tight. Perhaps the Kirk lothario is a draw, but Kirk also espoused many very positive ideas as well and was often disgusted by intolerance and bigotry.
When we get to TNG it's got to be a painful nightmare inducing horrorshow. TNG may not have had an openly TRIBBLE character, but there probably has been no more 'politically correct' show ever aired. They were absolutely fanatical in their stand against inequality and intolerance.
And, frankly, TNG is the show of my youth. It is my formative show. Whenever I needed to get away from current society I went there for a better one. And still do.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Althought I know we have seen all types of couples in Star Trek, I am trying to remember if we've actually seen/ met a legitimate heterosexual couple in STO content. I don't remeber to be sure. Maybe if we haven't, that might be why some people see it as "shoved in thier face". Have we even seen/met a mixed species coue in STO? Obviously, we have seen the products of those couples, but I don't think we've actually seen/met couples.
The Orion female bartender in Night of the Comet caring for her presumably-human boyfriend/whatever after the bar fight comes to mind. There are also references to heterosexual couplehood by one member or another with Tom Paris in Delta Flight and way back in Duties of Command on the KDF side, where you go to the deceased First Officer's Par'Mach'kai, Ch'gren, to tell him how she died, and probably a few others who mention a spouse. There's also the implied relationship of not-Worf and not-Jadzia, seen arguing on the pier structure on Risa during the night
Yes. People, especially children, deal with violent themes differently from how they deal with sexual ones. It doesn't matter if that's cultural or biological or if you think it's fair. It's just true.
The fact that this discussion even exists is sufficient to prove the material is inappropriate for this venue. It's a mature theme that doesn't belong in material marketed for children. Again, it doesn't matter if you think that's fair or the way things should be; it's just true. We're not there yet.
It's only a mature theme to some because they reduce same-sex partners to just the act of having sex, which they don't seem to do with opposite-sex partners. My parents displayed much more physical affection in front of me than these people do (which is absolutely none) as a child, were they exposing me to mature themes? Should they have been arrested? The source material for this game is far more mature in its themes, and depictions of sexuality, and the worst of those episodes are considered TVPG here in the US. A shrinking number of us aren't there yet. They just happen to be the most vocal about it.
The purpose of this kind of response is not to educate--attempting to do so is a waste of everyone's time; they are not going to change their beliefs. The purpose is to reduce the bigot's overall harm to society by conditioning them to expect hostility and strong pushback whenever they behave offensively towards others and ought to know better. They need to be made to understand that actions have consequences, and that while they are free to believe whatever they like, they will be isolated and shunned if they cannot learn to refrain from behaving offensively in public.
In no way will I allow something that goes against these forums, or one of the most important things Star Trek can teach us. We can grow as human beings, else we wouldn't have progressed to the point where we are.
I am not allowing any more naming and shaming in this thread. Bannings are going to happen.
Just finished the mission too and yeah, this is a good one.
- I like the design and atmosphere, especially the lack of mini-map. Really drives home the point you are behind enemy lines, up to your eyeballs, and better move quick to accomplish your mission.
- So far I like "House" Pegh. Gives the Klingons a bit more dimension and demonstrates they can show cunning as well as courage, something I myself have advocated more than once. I hope we see more of them.
- Though it does look like he may have had one too many a Rokeg Blood Pie, Kahless really shines in this one. I like how he acknowledges the reality of his situation, that he ultimately really is a figurehead ruler, known more by his reputation and lore than actual accomplishments. And in the end one gets the impression his undertaking the mission and his actions were his plan all along. Against an enemy as nebulous and obtuse as the Iconians, beings who have done everything they can to play up their agelessness, their power, their capacity for decimation, Kahless gave the alliance and the galaxy the victory it really needs at this point.
He proved that even gods can bleed.
I can see accounts and holovids of his battle being broadcast to every world, every colony, every ship in the Empire and beyond, and a million, billion beings crying out in one voice, in one united stand.
You do not come for us, oh mighty Iconians.
WE come for YOU. :mad:
Kudos to the Dev team all around and I can't wait to see what's next.
OH YES!
/10char
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
Thank you. I'm tired of the bigotry. Even if I don't agree with someone's lifestyle, there are far more serious problems with the world that need to be addressed.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I'm going to say that I am a little disappointed by the House Pegh storyline. I've only played it part way through so far, so I can't comment on everything. I may have more comments later.
SPOILERS FOLLOW!!!!
What should have been a moving story about the sacrifice one man makes to stand against evil and save others was turned into a politically correct/incorrect sideshow. I do not support that or agree with it.
I mean, you have freaking Kahless himself being killed by the Iconians and the Sword of Kahless lost in an Iconian base. It's a tragedy! Very dramatic storytelling! But it ends up being about a TRIBBLE couple in the forums.
I can admire devotion and affection for another person, regardless of gender. It doesn't have to be about sex. It didn't have to be about sex here, and would have played just as well without using the word 'mate'. It's a word with a very specific meaning in a specific biological context.
I feel that in their attempt to be politically correct, Cryptic not only invited controversy they also distracted and detracted from the story they were trying to tell. The death of Kahless at the hands of the Iconians.
I feel they also showed a lack of respect for the fact that the game is played by children as well as adults (rated T!) and this was an inappropriate subject to casually toss in.
I will say that it was at least not extremely overt and many children will miss it (as some of the adults did). But I feel parents have the right to be aware when things like this are brought up in a game context and not be blindsided by them. I am previewing the episode and have a chance to be a responsible parent to my teenage sons who play STO and have a discussion about it. If Cryptic wants to set this as a precedent and abuse my trust in their discretion, then I either need to preview every single episode before my sons get a chance to play it or I need to prevent them from playing at all. Either way, Cryptic, do you really want people preventing their kids from logging in at convenient times?
There was one other thing that bothered me about the story and it had nothing to do with the subject of mates. The fact that a character gets away with calling a Dahar Master a petaQ and I don't get to knock them on their butts or threaten to kill them for it like a good Klingon would have done, that was very unsatisfying.
All respectable points.
Being a parent myself, I want to know what is being served up in a games kids play are something that I can approve for them, and be able to instruct and discuss any controversies that are encountered. While I know the game has violence, that is an upfront and known product. I would hope that parents have already had a proper discussion with thier teenage children about same sex relationships, but the maturity level of some (male) ealry teenagers is still somewhat low and require more supervision and discussion. Teenage years can be rough, especially for a parent.
The one area especially this content could be frustrating is for the parent who lets thier sub-teen children play. I had a fleetie early in the game that let his 7 year old son play. I don't know of he would've wanted the in game content to be a starting point for the same sex relationship discussion, which also could lead into the other big conversation, sex itself. But the game is rated for teens, so parents should be seeing content before the child does anyways, so any parent should know better. But in the end, it should be the parents responsibilty to say yes or no to the child playing the game, if the game goes beyond what is acceptable to the parents decision of what they want their children to be exposed to, they should stop the children from playing.
Would I want my teenager to see the content in question? I dont think that I would have a problem for them to see it as our family situation would have had them to be confronted with it already. Would I want my 7 year old to see it? Probably not, unless we have already had those conversations.
My preference? I really wished they had no romantic relationships shown in game, straight, homsexual, bi-sexual or tri-sexuall. But thats how I personally like my sci-fi games.
That was an advantage of paid subs, if you dont want the kid playing, cancel he sub.
I especially agree on the Klingon "petaQ" incident. Theres a certain level of come-upins when a Klingon speaks dishonorably to a superior. There should be have been an option to physically or verbal rebuke for that.
You took a great thread and turned it into a warring political discussion. I'm perfectly happy for political discussions, but not ones with the volatility and disrespect I'm seeing. Hell, I'm even going through posts about TRIBBLE Germany! And for what? A difference for opinion displayed in what is very, very unfortunately a horrendous way (on both accounts even).
There is political necessity and the values that we find in our civil liberties. When we defend them, we are defending ourselves. But too often do we flat out go on the attack. Don't like the fact that you thought the TRIBBLE couple was placed in awkwardly to you? Say that. Are you happy that you saw a progressive inclusion of marganilized groups? Say that!
But don't flame each other for it. If you're unhappy with someone or something and cannot constructively express it, then take some to cool down before you post. This applies to both sides of the parties.
Now listen up.
If you are unhappy about the lesbians then you should explain why in a constructive manner. Be civil and be respectful. It's in the ToS. It's really not hard to do. If you find people are getting upset and arguing with you a lot, re-examine your posts.
If you are unhappy about others being unhappy about the lesbians, you can disagree but be civil and respectful. I'm bisexual myself, and even I'm appalled at the manner people here are treating those who disagree with the episode and/or LGBT folks. Do you think calling someone a bigot is going to suddenly make them decide :
"You know what? I'm going to rethink my stance on this considering you just publically called me that!"
God no! It furthers a divide and shuts down the conversation by creating an even greater rift between you. It awards you no points other than venting at their expense. It doesn't help make progressive momentum. It creates an 'Us' vs 'Them'. The only way to bridge that divide is with some god damn compassion.
Seriously. I'm going to unleash the hammer if this doesn't knock off. Please. Impress me and show civility and kindness to each other.
All hail the voice of reason.
And her ban hammer.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
Well the common response to anyone that doesn't like something in the game applies: "Don't like it, don't play it." It's really as simple as that. To all those that are so offended, can I haz your stuffs? I think the Devs added a subtle and classy addition of IDIC in this episode.
Oh but the children, the CHILDREN!!! So 97% naked orions complete with a sexual trait, the summer orgy event, a male NPC watching a male NPC stripper, essentially having furries represented in game with Cataian/Faresians, Not to mention the mass slaughter of the Acamarians, Borg, Breen, Cardassian, Gorn, Federation species, Heralds, Kazon, Klingons, Malon, Nausicaans, Orions, Romulans, Remans, Tholians, and Vaaudwar just to name a few. My main toon has killed more people than every evil person that has ever existed during recorded history. All that is okay with some, but the briefest inclusion of a same sex couple sends you into Picard rage?
Lily Sloane: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt your little quest. Captain Ahab has to go hunt his whale!
Jean-Luc Picard: [offended] What?
Sloane: You do have books in the 24th-century?
Picard: This is not about homophobia!
Sloane: Liar!
Picard: [agitated] This is about saving the future of our precious children!
Sloane: Jean-Luc, they're just people in relationships!!!
Picard: NO! NOOOOOOOOO!!! [smashes a display case in anger; Both pause, shocked] I will not sacrifice the status quo. We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our television, and we fall back. They start blogs and websites, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!
Sloane: [looking at the broken remains of the Enterprise-D model] You broke your little ship. [pause] See you around, Ahab.
Picard: [softly, to himself] "And he piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the rage and hate felt by his whole race. If his chest had been a cannon he would have shot his heart upon it."
Sloane: What?
Picard: Moby ****.
Sloane: Actually, I never read it.
Picard: Ahab spent years hunting the white whale that crippled him; but in the end, it destroyed him and his ship.
Sloane: I guess he didn't know when to quit.
The Orion female bartender in Night of the Comet caring for her presumably-human boyfriend/whatever after the bar fight comes to mind. There are also references to heterosexual couplehood by one member or another with Tom Paris in Delta Flight and way back in Duties of Command on the KDF side, where you go to the deceased First Officer's Par'Mach'kai, Ch'gren, to tell him how she died, and probably a few others who mention a spouse. There's also the implied relationship of not-Worf and not-Jadzia, seen arguing on the pier structure on Risa during the night
I invite you to show your work.
It's only a mature theme to some because they reduce same-sex partners to just the act of having sex, which they don't seem to do with opposite-sex partners. My parents displayed much more physical affection in front of me than these people do (which is absolutely none) as a child, were they exposing me to mature themes? Should they have been arrested? The source material for this game is far more mature in its themes, and depictions of sexuality, and the worst of those episodes are considered TVPG here in the US. A shrinking number of us aren't there yet. They just happen to be the most vocal about it.
I forgot about them. I guess the Orion and the officer on the station could have been in a relationship, I just took her as being an Orion and a bartendender schmoozing a probably big tipper. My whole thought was if some people didnt see a in game straight couple, they might have thought seeing a LGBT couple as the "first" might be pushing the subject to the forefront without representation and becomming sociopolitical.
As far as children developing differently versus sex and violence, it is true. Thats why violence is an easier subject to talk about to a child (andget the to comprehend) than sex is.
Comments
There are two ways to deal with bigots, and which way is appropriate depends on whether or not they are reachable.
The first, most ideal way is to educate them. And for many, simple arguments based on appeals to decency and common ground will work. Often they just need to have the impact of their actions brought home in a personal way--they can't or won't see the problem until it affects them or their immediate family, which is why you see so many conservative politicians or public figures have a sudden change of heart when an issue affects their family.
But it is a fact that there are also many who cannot be reached. Regardless of how they say they feel about homosexuality, their actual behavior is informed by a deeply-entrenched animus that they may or may not admit exists. They do not accept that there is any problem with their behavior, and are not interested in accepting new information or evolving their attitudes on this subject.
This second sort can usually be identified pretty quickly by their sneering contempt towards "equality" or "social justice". People like this aren't ignorant of the fact that they're being offensive. They're proud of it, and view their resistance to civil rights as a brave stand against oppression that is somehow not bigotry because it involves TRIBBLE people and because reasons.
These people can and should be shamed. Not for all eternity; I'm not talking about making them wear a scarlet letter or any inane nonsense like that. But in direct response to specific behaviors. When they unapologetically behave in an offensive and bigoted way, the appropriate response--the only response that has ever worked for dealing with the unreachable holdouts of bigotry, in the long term--is social opprobrium.
In other words, the unified disapproval of society.
The purpose of this kind of response is not to educate--attempting to do so is a waste of everyone's time; they are not going to change their beliefs. The purpose is to reduce the bigot's overall harm to society by conditioning them to expect hostility and strong pushback whenever they behave offensively towards others and ought to know better. They need to be made to understand that actions have consequences, and that while they are free to believe whatever they like, they will be isolated and shunned if they cannot learn to refrain from behaving offensively in public.
That disapproval can be civil, in the sense that it need not include gratuitous insults. But by definition it is direct and devoid of respect, which can be misinterpreted as uncivil.
Eclipse Class Intel Cruiser U.S.S. Dioscuria NX-91121-A - Interactive Crew Roster
Actually it makes sense for her to think that way. She understand combat and knows that the longer the team is in the base, the combat-related risks go up. By that time she had already thought it over and decided that the overall risk was acceptable and planned for it only for your character to come in and decide to change the numbers. Being overprotective couple with it being a last-minute change, it may have increased her views of the personal casualty risk to become significantly higher than the 7% risk the particles offered.
your entire post reads as toxic, inflamatory flame bait, riling people up to continue being bigots to each other, no matter if they're progressives or conservatives.
We fight them too. Entire armies spilling out of Volkswagens.
We do our best to fight them off, but they keep sending them in.
I personally feel the death of Khaless was pointless and clunkily written. The fact that the discussion completely ignores this plot point seem to proof I'm not alone with that notion. If anybody feels "distracted" by the TRIBBLE Klingons it's their personal problem - what's distracting in case of this episode is the overall writing.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion. But how is that scene "inappropriate for children" in a game which consists, up to that point, 98% of killing?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Yes. People, especially children, deal with violent themes differently from how they deal with sexual ones. It doesn't matter if that's cultural or biological or if you think it's fair. It's just true.
The fact that this discussion even exists is sufficient to prove the material is inappropriate for this venue. It's a mature theme that doesn't belong in material marketed for children. Again, it doesn't matter if you think that's fair or the way things should be; it's just true. We're not there yet.
Eclipse Class Intel Cruiser U.S.S. Dioscuria NX-91121-A - Interactive Crew Roster
I recall a scene in Philadelphia where Tom Hanks character was considering coming out to his bosses when he overhears them telling a TRIBBLE joke in the locker room. To the men making this joke it is nothing, but to Hanks it was devastating and told him all he needed to know.
So when Cryptic puts this scenario in the game. How can they not foresee someone coming in with cries of deviancy, think of the children, etc etc etc. Now, to the majority these words are nothing. But to those who have lost everything in life because of them. Well, telling them to be happy with hearing it here in the forum - well it doesn't sit well with me. No. Not one bit.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
i would agree wholeheartedly but then i would be something of a hypocrite for failing to point out;
1. the lockbox system, that preys kids primarily who do not understand the risks of paying money into these things, yes there is the closed loop way of getting the end product but kids dont understand what money is and what patience and planning is about at their age.. and yet these are still common practice.
2. the risa event is a big one because of the amount of exposure of a virtual body on display its almost adult rated, almost pornographic. and then you got the orion females as well in their metal bikini. again kids play this despite the rating.
these are not the only issues either as examples, there are more and if i agreed to what you are getting at i would be ignoring all that. there are a lot of inappropriate topics and things thrown into this game that goes beyond the rating that is inappropriate.
but from the way i see it, if you expose children to certain inappropriate topics instead of hiding it and having to form their own opinions, good, bad or indifferent. you could help them understand as they grow up instead by showing them what is out there before they can fully form that opinion. i cant state if its a good choice or not, i dont have kids of my own but thats another example of a flawed opinion.
i dont agree with the hand holding culture or it reaching the game but yet even i disagree with a few things, one of them primary above others is the generalized casual greed the system is based on in value for virtual goods, but thats a dead issue so i dont bother with it and that includes the above, the lockbox system. i think people and kids should be told the dangers of using money on the game and that the in game system can also give you what you want without needing to spend anything just as well, it should be clearly defined as well as tips that could help you decide for or against spending money, while it could be seen as exposing kids to new ideas, however it could also be seen as a way of pad-walling the walls to keep things too safe and restricted.
so then we come back to the point of inappropriate, i would like to agree but i can not.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
It shouldn't be a mature theme. It's a person stating she loves another person. Gender is completely irrelevant there and there was no mention of them rutting the sheets.
You would need to ban nearly every cartoon out there if it's not allowed to show couples.
Join Starfleet,
Boldly go where no man has gone before,
Meet interesting new species, and Kill them!
I am just... devestated, reading the reactions to that episode, considering we are still in a forum largely dedicated to Star Trek. And that, well... *points at signature*
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Who is the bigot here? Some for just questioning some intents of the DEVs in writing this episode or those who are trying to flame/troll? This is still very civil discussion until you interject the "bigot" comment just because some dare to question something that is out of place in an MMO.
There is still freedom of speech in some countries as long as its civil. Respect others as you like to be respected.
I won't argue the topic of who's ready and who's not, but I still fail to see how this is a mature theme. They said they were a TRIBBLE couple, they did NOT give an in depth explanation of what happens in their quarters at night.
It was no different than a heterosexual woman referring to a man as their husband, and should not have set off the explosive reaction it has.
It's kind of unfortunate, isn't it? That a universe devoted to diversity and learning about other points of view and cultures and ways of life... has fans that are so afraid of anything of the sort.
Or was it flamebaiting of Trek to include the first inter-racial kiss on television?
We fight them too. Entire armies spilling out of Volkswagens.
We do our best to fight them off, but they keep sending them in.
I have to say I wish they hadn't killed off the Khaless character (but as he was a clone I guess Koloth could clone him again.) :eek::D;)
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I play this game every day with my children. EVERY. DAY.
One is 10. One is 14. In no way shape or form have they in any way been damaged by exposure to those "horrible" Klesbians. In my honest opinion, most of those screaming "think of the children" and claiming that it is some kind of mature content probably don't have kids.
The only people who get worked up over something like that are people with prejudices deeply ingrained in them. No one is forcing YOU to be TRIBBLE by being TRIBBLE. No one is forcing YOU to have homosexual relationships just because they are. And the reality is, people of all sexual orientations exist and have exactly the same rights as you do, especially in the Star Trek universe.
During the mission, the situation evoked little more than a double take on all of our parts. It wasn't shocking and it didn't require us to stop and have an extended discussion of the facts of life. There were definitely flaws in the writing of the mission (although I did enjoy it) but the casual reference to the same-sex couple was, in my opinion, just right. Nothing forced or overly politically correct, just a matter-of-fact "this is how they are" which is exactly where anything to do with sexual orientation should be, in STO or in the real world.
I have noticed over the years here a small minority who ignore the Trek philosophy so that they can keep on enjoying a space fantasy experience. There is a powerful cognitive disssonance inherent to that so it is crucial to keep one's eyes closed tight. Perhaps the Kirk lothario is a draw, but Kirk also espoused many very positive ideas as well and was often disgusted by intolerance and bigotry.
When we get to TNG it's got to be a painful nightmare inducing horrorshow. TNG may not have had an openly TRIBBLE character, but there probably has been no more 'politically correct' show ever aired. They were absolutely fanatical in their stand against inequality and intolerance.
And, frankly, TNG is the show of my youth. It is my formative show. Whenever I needed to get away from current society I went there for a better one. And still do.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
The Orion female bartender in Night of the Comet caring for her presumably-human boyfriend/whatever after the bar fight comes to mind. There are also references to heterosexual couplehood by one member or another with Tom Paris in Delta Flight and way back in Duties of Command on the KDF side, where you go to the deceased First Officer's Par'Mach'kai, Ch'gren, to tell him how she died, and probably a few others who mention a spouse. There's also the implied relationship of not-Worf and not-Jadzia, seen arguing on the pier structure on Risa during the night
I invite you to show your work.
It's only a mature theme to some because they reduce same-sex partners to just the act of having sex, which they don't seem to do with opposite-sex partners. My parents displayed much more physical affection in front of me than these people do (which is absolutely none) as a child, were they exposing me to mature themes? Should they have been arrested? The source material for this game is far more mature in its themes, and depictions of sexuality, and the worst of those episodes are considered TVPG here in the US. A shrinking number of us aren't there yet. They just happen to be the most vocal about it.
Here's the first link that comes up when you search for content ratings for Modern Family. That show is way more mature in its themes than an offhanded mention that this is a same-sex couple, and is tagged as appropriate for age 13, at the highest.
I am not allowing any more naming and shaming in this thread. Bannings are going to happen.
fair enough, im withdrawing from this but i also had more to state.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
OH YES!
/10char
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
Thank you. I'm tired of the bigotry. Even if I don't agree with someone's lifestyle, there are far more serious problems with the world that need to be addressed.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
Eclipse Class Intel Cruiser U.S.S. Dioscuria NX-91121-A - Interactive Crew Roster
There's already been an official thread closed. Dunno if I should mention which one, it really went off the rails.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
All respectable points.
Being a parent myself, I want to know what is being served up in a games kids play are something that I can approve for them, and be able to instruct and discuss any controversies that are encountered. While I know the game has violence, that is an upfront and known product. I would hope that parents have already had a proper discussion with thier teenage children about same sex relationships, but the maturity level of some (male) ealry teenagers is still somewhat low and require more supervision and discussion. Teenage years can be rough, especially for a parent.
The one area especially this content could be frustrating is for the parent who lets thier sub-teen children play. I had a fleetie early in the game that let his 7 year old son play. I don't know of he would've wanted the in game content to be a starting point for the same sex relationship discussion, which also could lead into the other big conversation, sex itself. But the game is rated for teens, so parents should be seeing content before the child does anyways, so any parent should know better. But in the end, it should be the parents responsibilty to say yes or no to the child playing the game, if the game goes beyond what is acceptable to the parents decision of what they want their children to be exposed to, they should stop the children from playing.
Would I want my teenager to see the content in question? I dont think that I would have a problem for them to see it as our family situation would have had them to be confronted with it already. Would I want my 7 year old to see it? Probably not, unless we have already had those conversations.
My preference? I really wished they had no romantic relationships shown in game, straight, homsexual, bi-sexual or tri-sexuall. But thats how I personally like my sci-fi games.
That was an advantage of paid subs, if you dont want the kid playing, cancel he sub.
I especially agree on the Klingon "petaQ" incident. Theres a certain level of come-upins when a Klingon speaks dishonorably to a superior. There should be have been an option to physically or verbal rebuke for that.
All hail the voice of reason.
And her ban hammer.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
Oh but the children, the CHILDREN!!! So 97% naked orions complete with a sexual trait, the summer orgy event, a male NPC watching a male NPC stripper, essentially having furries represented in game with Cataian/Faresians, Not to mention the mass slaughter of the Acamarians, Borg, Breen, Cardassian, Gorn, Federation species, Heralds, Kazon, Klingons, Malon, Nausicaans, Orions, Romulans, Remans, Tholians, and Vaaudwar just to name a few. My main toon has killed more people than every evil person that has ever existed during recorded history. All that is okay with some, but the briefest inclusion of a same sex couple sends you into Picard rage?
Lily Sloane: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt your little quest. Captain Ahab has to go hunt his whale!
Jean-Luc Picard: [offended] What?
Sloane: You do have books in the 24th-century?
Picard: This is not about homophobia!
Sloane: Liar!
Picard: [agitated] This is about saving the future of our precious children!
Sloane: Jean-Luc, they're just people in relationships!!!
Picard: NO! NOOOOOOOOO!!! [smashes a display case in anger; Both pause, shocked] I will not sacrifice the status quo. We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our television, and we fall back. They start blogs and websites, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!
Sloane: [looking at the broken remains of the Enterprise-D model] You broke your little ship. [pause] See you around, Ahab.
Picard: [softly, to himself] "And he piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the rage and hate felt by his whole race. If his chest had been a cannon he would have shot his heart upon it."
Sloane: What?
Picard: Moby ****.
Sloane: Actually, I never read it.
Picard: Ahab spent years hunting the white whale that crippled him; but in the end, it destroyed him and his ship.
Sloane: I guess he didn't know when to quit.
It's a game, get a grip.
I forgot about them. I guess the Orion and the officer on the station could have been in a relationship, I just took her as being an Orion and a bartendender schmoozing a probably big tipper. My whole thought was if some people didnt see a in game straight couple, they might have thought seeing a LGBT couple as the "first" might be pushing the subject to the forefront without representation and becomming sociopolitical.
As far as children developing differently versus sex and violence, it is true. Thats why violence is an easier subject to talk about to a child (andget the to comprehend) than sex is.