Hogwarts Legacy - Not as good as Dog Kid University

[b00dles]

I do find this new argument of "if this sold zero would she change her mind?" As being one of the strangest yet. 

 

No, she probably won't but she'll have less money than she did before and me not buying it is a point I'm making. 

That's essentially it. 

 

Me doing the recycling does fuck all but I like to help out and if not buying this might help in any way then that's good enough for me. 

 

Apologies for everyone that did work on the game that isn't a trans hating sensible but this is a protest vote and that's about all I can do. 

 

If you want to buy it, OK, good for you but it isn't the same as tencent owning x% of a company or the Saudis owning shares on some other company. It just isn't.

 

[Strafe]

6 minutes ago, Darren said:

 

Well there are a couple of things here.

 

First, nobody is expecting anything of anyone, or calling anyone a bad person for buying this game, or anything like that. All that's being said is that if you do so knowing what we do about Rowling's views and her explicit linking of her royalties to the acceptability of her views then you can't claim to be a trans ally. You can still be sympathetic, but you consider your own entertainment/desire to pacify your kids as more important than standing shoulder to shoulder with the trans people who have explained why they'd like you not to buy it. That's all, it's simply a matter of priorities, and everyone's are different.

 

Second, if there are worse offenders than Rowling for trans persecution profiting from video games I'd very much like to know who they are so I can avoid their stuff too.

Nintendo. The Kingdom of Saudi has 6.1% in them and receive a large amount of money as a result. Saudi spend a lot of money on conversion therapy and being trans is a crime over there with a rather severe punishment.

 

I think Saudi Arabia is definitely worse on trans persecution than JK Rowling is.

 

Of course, all the money from Nintendo goes into the same pot as all the money from all the other sources go, so it’s easy here to imagine that the Nintendo money from the pot goes into a nice water treatment facility or something but it doesn’t really work that way.

 

I’ve said this before, more than once. I think it’s fine to boycott HL because of Rowling when you might not boycott Nintendo/Saudi because you can’t support everything and Rowling is a singular person. I do not think it fine to do the above whilst accusing others of funding trans hate/not being an ally etc. If you set standards, you should abide by them.

[Rex Grossman]

Just now, b00dles said:

I do find this new argument of "if this sold zero would she change her mind?" As being one of the strangest yet. 

 

No, she probably won't but she'll have less money than she did before and me not buying it is a point I'm making. 

That's essentially it. 

 

Most boycotts are about assuaging our own guilt or trying to minimise our contribution to something terrible. It's rarely about enforcing real change.

 

Boycotting this game will make people feel better about themselves but it won't change JKR.

[b00dles]

1 minute ago, Rex Grossman said:

 

Most boycotts are about assuaging our own guilt or trying to minimise our contribution to something terrible. It's rarely about enforcing real change.

 

Boycotting this game will make people feel better about themselves but it won't change JKR.

Obviously it won't but it might send a message. 

 

I don't think I can change her mind but I can choose to not give her money, so I'm going to do that. 

[Darren]

5 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

And a lot of people feel the need to tell others that they're morally bankrupt if they think about buying it

 

Nobody is doing this.

[Strafe]

Just now, Darren said:

 

Nobody is doing this.

Scroll back a bit.

[Rex Grossman]

2 minutes ago, b00dles said:

Obviously it won't but it might send a message. 

 

I don't think I can change her mind but I can choose to not give her money, so I'm going to do that. 

 

I'm not criticising it or minimising it. It's just that I think some people are overstating the connection between sales of this game and trans rights around the world.

 

And I think the idea that it can send a message is a dangerous one because if that's the idea then what happens if/when the game is a hit? Validation that she was right all along?

[b00dles]

5 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Nintendo. The Kingdom of Saudi has 6.1% in them and receive a large amount of money as a result. Saudi spend a lot of money on conversion therapy and being trans is a crime over there with a rather severe punishment.

 

I think Saudi Arabia is definitely worse on trans persecution than JK Rowling is.

 

Of course, all the money from Nintendo goes into the same pot as all the money from all the other sources go, so it’s easy here to imagine that the Nintendo money from the pot goes into a nice water treatment facility or something but it doesn’t really work that way.

 

I’ve said this before, more than once. I think it’s fine to boycott HL because of Rowling when you might not boycott Nintendo/Saudi because you can’t support everything and Rowling is a singular person. I do not think it fine to do the above whilst accusing others of funding trans hate/not being an ally etc. If you set standards, you should abide by them.

If I had more photo shop skills, I'd arrange all the words in this post and their orientation so that it depicted the "we live in a society" picture when zoomed out a bit. 

[Darren]

3 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Nintendo. The Kingdom of Saudi has 6.1% in them and receive a large amount of money as a result. Saudi spend a lot of money on conversion therapy and being trans is a crime over there with a rather severe punishment.

 

I think Saudi Arabia is definitely worse on trans persecution than JK Rowling is.

 

Of course, all the money from Nintendo goes into the same pot as all the money from all the other sources go, so it’s easy here to imagine that the Nintendo money from the pot goes into a nice water treatment facility or something but it doesn’t really work that way.

 

I’ve said this before, more than once. I think it’s fine to boycott HL because of Rowling when you might not boycott Nintendo/Saudi because you can’t support everything and Rowling is a singular person. I do not think it fine to do the above whilst accusing others of funding trans hate/not being an ally etc. If you set standards, you should abide by them.

 

But again we're back to the participate in society cartoon. Saudi Arabia owns shares in all sorts of companies in all sorts of industries, as do lots of horrible individual people. It's simply impossible to avoid ever buying anything that might end up increasing the wealth of appalling shareholders without, as I said, fucking off the modern world entirely and becoming a hermit.

 

Having said that I'll look a bit closer into the Nintendo thing so thanks for the heads up on that.

[Rex Grossman]

1 minute ago, Darren said:

Having said that I'll look a bit closer into the Nintendo thing so thanks for the heads up on that.

 

They recently upped their stake, too.

[b00dles]

1 minute ago, Rex Grossman said:

 

I'm not criticising it or minimising it. It's just that I think some people are overstating the connection between sales of this game and trans rights around the world.

 

And I think the idea that it can send a message is a dangerous one because if that's the idea then what happens if/when the game is a hit? Validation that she was right all along?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that not buying this game will make trans people fully accepted in society or fix all the ills because that would be phenomenally stupid. 

 

What is being said is that it turns out that JKR is a stupid TERF and a lot of people don't want to give her any money any more, even if it is tangentially. That's it. 

 

Similarly if it does well, I'm not going to just suddenly join the terf brigade and no one has suggested that kind of link either. JKR and some other idiots will probably claim that too (as much as some allies might get over excited if this doesn't do as well as expected if it turns out as shit as it looks) but these bizarre extremes aren't what anyone is talking about. 

 

 

[Strafe]

2 minutes ago, b00dles said:

If I had more photo shop skills, I'd arrange all the words in this post and their orientation so that it depicted the "we live in a society" picture when zoomed out a bit. 

 

Just now, Darren said:

 

But again we're back to the participate in society cartoon. Saudi Arabia owns shares in all sorts of companies in all sorts of industries, as do lots of horrible individual people. It's simply impossible to avoid ever buying anything that might end up increasing the wealth of appalling shareholders without, as I said, fucking off the modern world entirely and becoming a hermit.

 

Having said that I'll look a bit closer into the Nintendo thing so thanks for the heads up on that.

 

I don't disagree with these.

 

Again (and I might have to make this my sig I've said it so much), I think it's admirable to boycott the game on a moral stance (assuming you would have bought it otherwise), and I know you can't support everything. I just don't like the hypocrisy of telling people they aren't allies/complicit/are bad people when we all are.
 

[Strafe]

2 minutes ago, Rex Grossman said:

 

They recently upped their stake, too.

 
I believe that's what took it to 6.1% (well, 6.07%)

[b00dles]

Just now, Strafe said:

 

 

I don't disagree with these.

 

Again (and I might have to make this my sig I've said it so much), I think it's admirable to boycott the game on a moral stance (assuming you would have bought it otherwise), and I know you can't support everything. I just don't like the hypocrisy of telling people they aren't allies/complicit/are bad people when we all are.
 

Yeah but we aren't all saying that you're bad either. 

[Strafe]

Just now, b00dles said:

Yeah but we aren't all saying that you're bad either. 

 

No, not everyone is.

[Floyd]

1 hour ago, Darren said:

 

It's absolutely not hypocritical to take a stance on some issues while accepting that it's basically impossible to take a stance on all issues without becoming a cave dwelling hermit.

 

 

That's true and I exaggerated to make my point. There's also a difference to something that's already out there and something new. This being something new it can be used as a way of protest against the creator, which is fair enough.

[b00dles]

Just now, Strafe said:

 

No, not everyone is.

OK so stop banging on about the Saudis when people say they aren't going to buy this game because they don't like JKR.

[thesnwmn]

1 minute ago, b00dles said:

Similarly if it does well, I'm not going to just suddenly join the terf brigade and no one has suggested that kind of link either. JKR and some other idiots will probably claim that too (as much as some allies might get over excited if this doesn't do as well as expected if it turns out as shit as it looks) but these bizarre extremes aren't what anyone is talking about. 

 

Not quite. But it was suggested a few pages back that this was the case. That good sales mean her views are supported.

 

I consider that to be a defeatist and silly line of thinking because I think by most measures this will do pretty well. So up front that saying her views are widely held and supported. Not a good way to spin it before it's even released.

[b00dles]

Just now, Floyd said:

 

 

That's true and I exaggerated to make my point. There's also a difference to something that's already out there and something new. This being something new it can be used as a way of protest against the creator, which is fair enough.

I'm sorry what? Are trans people new or something?

[Strafe]

Just now, b00dles said:

OK so stop banging on about the Saudis when people say they aren't going to buy this game because they don't like JKR.

 

I'm "banging on" about the people saying you can't buy this game and not be against trans persecution, using the Saudi's as an example of double standards.

[Strafe]

1 minute ago, b00dles said:

I'm sorry what? Are trans people new or something?

 

The game. He's talking about the game.

[Rex Grossman]

4 minutes ago, Strafe said:

 
I believe that's what took it to 6.1% (well, 6.07%)

 

Ah, OK.

[thesnwmn]

14 minutes ago, Darren said:

 

Nobody is doing this.

 

Yeah, I was over playing that for effect. Sorry.

 

There are statements in here that at least imply, if not state, that people are bad and unthinking or a little uncaring if they're still buying it.

 

Or that the only way to interpret buying the game is that you support the views of JKR. Or that at least JKR will interpret it this way. Which, as above, I don't consider to be a good way of thinking about it.

[Floyd]

1 minute ago, b00dles said:

I'm sorry what? Are trans people new or something?

 

No, I mean new as in the game is new.

 

 

[Rex Grossman]

1 minute ago, thesnwmn said:

There are statements in here that at least imply, if not state, that people are bad and unthinking or a little uncaring if they're still buying it.

 

Thankfully I'm not in this position but I do feel for parents who have a child old enough to play the game but young enough that they can't grasp the issues around the game.

 

Having to choose between your principles on trans rights and your children is... unpleasant I would imagine.

[b00dles]

1 minute ago, Floyd said:

 

No, I mean new as in the game is new.

 

 

Oh right. Doesn't even look that new either though

[Darren]

19 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Scroll back a bit.

 

I've re-read the last three pages and can't see anyone doing it. Quote me up please!

 

[PaB]

This is all getting a bit silly. No one has to justify their purchases or boycotts. It’s up the individual. 
 

The very nature of a personal binary choice is that you are going to have differing opinions of where you draw the line and why. 

 

Buying this doesn’t automatically make you anti trans (or not a trans ally). Boycotting it doesn’t make you inconsistent or hypocritical.

[DennyDifferent]

3 minutes ago, Rex Grossman said:

Thankfully I'm not in this position but I do feel for parents who have a child old enough to play the game but young enough that they can't grasp the issues around the game.

 

This is where I find myself. But for me it's more about a common interest that I have with my daughter. Like I said a few pages back, she's grown up with me reading her the books at bedtime etc. I enjoy this world in spite of JKR.

[Floyd]

1 minute ago, PaB said:

This is all getting a bit silly. No one has to justify their purchases or boycotts. It’s up the individual. 
 

The very nature of a personal binary choice is that you are going to have differing opinions of where you draw the line and why. 

 

Buying this doesn’t automatically make you anti trans (or not a trans ally). Boycotting it doesn’t make you inconsistent or hypocritical.

 

Yes! 100%