YEAH. THANKS FOR RUINING OUR FUN GUYS.

Yeah, it was always a gray area and a bit of an unspoken rule, but um, yeah. It's dumb that the administration did this. *sigh*

Post that argument anyway. I'd read it, though I guess you'd be preaching to the choir with that one.

I'm a minority that likes this, and it has nothing to do with me being religious. I can understand completely why people don't like this, but they also need to understand how many people, cultures don't like this for logical reasons. Until people have decided if it's really an immoral crime or until they become more accepting about the issue, it's best to leave it alone for now and respect why they did this.

*gets pummeled*

Oh, believe me, I agree with you. We agree with you. I do not like this rule one bit. I wish we didn't have to put it up. I utterly hate having to suppress stories about this, because it sends -entirely- the wrong message about how we (me, HH, the admins, others) feel about this matter.

However, I understand -completely- the reasoning behind it, and it's very very good reasoning. I have seen firsthand how hurtful and homophobic some people can get. (and that's -not- directed at you, Lady K, you're respectful about just about everything!) It's the same rationale as why we don't allow discussion of religion, because while some people can be completely reasonable and respectful about the subject, there are a lot of others who act in an absolutely despicable manner and quite honestly we don't want to have to deal with the carnage that ensues.

It's one of those things that's been up in the air and left never quite settled for a very long time, and it went pretty smoothly that way, but a few recent incidents forced a decision to be made. It's not the decision I'd have made, but it had to go one way or the other, with perfectly reasonable arguments for both sides. The final result isn't very fair, no, but I quite respect Six's decision, because of how rational it is – and because it wasn't made out of homophobia, which is the important part.

Perhaps it'll be reversed some time. If you really feel strongly about it, I absolutely encourage you to take it up with the admins, as HH has advised. They're the ones with the decision-making power in this.

Is it really that necessary that you guys have it though? I mean, if descriptive sexuality is forbidden, what made anyone think that such a sensitive topic in that field would even possibly be allowed? And, most importantly, the story would be about a kids toy on a kids website (unless it's in COT, but more stories are in the Library, and this is still a kids site). Kids don't need to be reading about that stuff, and their parents more than likely don't want their kid to do so. Even if half the population did want to read it, would it be better to disallow an unnecessary item or offend a lot of people?

EDIT: Before I get pummeled, I don't agree with censorship, and I don't have homophobia (Silly word. Silly concept, too), before anyone accuses me of that. But as somebody who has had leadership positions at school and such, the idea is to keep order. All of the above were possible scenarios that are very likely to happen. We just read Huck Finn in school, and I think that forced censorship is the silliest thing ever (most of the time, there's always a time and a place for everything). But still...this is a kid's website. First and foremost, this is a kid's website.

These are all good questions. My own rationale is that this shouldn't be a sensitive topic, and the only way that'll change is if people get used to seeing it. But, the reality is that this is an explosively sensitive subject, and we have to accommodate that reality somehow. There are various ways to do that; this one was chosen.

I could go into more detail, but that would only provide more material for people to object to, and that wouldn't be a very wise.

EDIT: I'ma slow typer... or just long-winded. Started writing this when there were only three replies to this entry.

I had the feeling the politics/religion precedent would be part of the reasoning behind the new rule...

Thing is though, the politics/religion rule says no politics/religion whatsoever. The rule does not say, "No discussing the Republican Party," or "No flaming of democracy," the rule says no politics of any sort. Same thing on the religion rule. I'm not a fan of that rule either but I put up with it because for one thing it's only generally an issue in COT, and this is a Bionicle forum after all, and for another thing, it's fair. You want to ban something to prevent flame wars, you ban the entire topic. Anything else is preferential treatment, or at least comes across as such.

In this situation what I'd deem fair is ban all love stories. Otherwise, let them all be.

What this really all goes back to is, I just hate it when the obnoxious complainers, the close-minded people, the people who can't have a reasonable discussion and instead resort to stubborn insults, I hate it when they get what they want. I sympathize with the mods who have to deal with the flaming, and I realize it's hard to find another solution to deal with the trouble they're causing... but it just ends up rewarding them and encouraging them, you know?

Like I've seen people say flat out that they're going to continue posting hateful, flaming messages intentionally to get the topic closed, despite how the discussion has managed to stay civil thus far. Lo and behold someone closes the topic. I know it's not an easy problem to deal with... but it just sends such a wrong message.

*sigh* Eh, I'm probably not going to take this up with the higher-ups though... if someone else wants to I'd support them, but I spend more time on other forums nowadays anyway.

Thank you ToM for clearly pointing that out, and glad I didn’t sound rude or anything, I try to be as respectful to most things, such as this. I just also like to point out I am in no way looking at this issue from a homophobic view (don’t want to confuse anyway), but rather what ToM has pointed out is an excellent and very logical way to see this matter.

Also, Advocate really has a good point. Regardless of what is truly right or wrong, it’s a kid’s website. I’ve been to plenty of sites where it appeared that they allowed a sensitive subject in, but it got seriously out of hand because people were either not accepting to it, or the abused it. BZP is such large site that you have to take extreme caution when allowing or disallowing things. Sometimes it isn’t fair at first, but it’s usually the safest approach in the long run.

Maybe in a few years it’ll be allowed and people will laugh about the past, or maybe even some situation will happen and people will all be glad that this originally annoying deal was not allowed (not implying anything specific, just making an example).

Anyway, it’s not like BZP is banning this from every website. Just go to another one to express your creativity, it’s not like the library forum here (no offence) is extremely active or full of inspiring writers in the first place. This is just the safest approach for awhile, I’d think.

ToM, that's a very, very good point. What seem like trivial topics aren't always trivial to everyone else. With Huck Finn, people choose to be offended by the language used. Here, people choose to be offended by something that doesn't effect them (I don't agree with it, for logical reasons, but I'm also not offended by it for logical reasons, lol). In both cases the offensive term/situation is unnecessary, causing the offense to be dealt with in a suitable manner. Granted Huck Finn used it for a message of equality.

I wish I could delve into my exact position on all of this, but it would be too much. After all, it's a kid's site. There would be little need for that. All in all, I think the rule is appropriate for the sake of keeping order.

My own rationale is that this shouldn't be a sensitive topic, and the only way that'll change is if people get used to seeing it.

That makes so much sense I could kiss you.

But, the reality is that this is an explosively sensitive subject, and we have to accommodate that reality somehow.

Is that the reality though? Everything's so very open these days.

Have there been a significant amount of complaints lodged at this type of thing?

Why, to disallow it is to send the message that there is something "wrong" that must be eliminated.

It's not a new rule, I believe it's been there at least as long as I've been on this site. At least in the Short Stories forum. Others I'm not so sure about.

Yeah, it stinks; yeah, it's ridiculous for any reasonable site to have such a rule. But I suppose I'd prefer posting stories on other sites to sifting through preteens' "Eww! Aren't they both boys/girls?"-type posts. I hope other authors can agree on this point. Remember that BIONICLE isn't exclusive property of BZP (though I haven't found any other sites that specialize in BIONICLE that are so large and well-organized).

One thing that would interest me... I'm seeing the faces of the people in this topic who aren't happy about this.

Calm, reserved and respectful.

What might the faces of those who are happy about this look like?

I just really can't imagine.

You pulled a red herring there; I don't think that's something worthwhile to point out other than make the discussion tense. If people are glad about this then they are glad for their own reasons.

Hmm. I didn't realize it when I said that , but yeah. That appears to be exactly what I did. Good call.

On a side note:

Does anyone else dislike the term "close-minded?" I mean, it's a very hypocritical term that in itself is close-minded (for lack of a better term...maybe that's why it's still used). Maybe it's just me.

Not picking on you Lyger, lol. It's just something that I thought of.

I'm enjoying this discussion. Everybody has intelligent comments with well-educated and logical points for the most part.

I fully support loaded questions such as the one above, because they make valid points that people aren't comfortable with. And I love discomfort.

especiallyifithurts.jpg

Yeah, one of the things I was wondering was whether it was because of the horrible horrible people who are violently opposed to such stories in a way that makes me lose faith in humanity or whether it was because the administration was personally against the subject matter, whether or not anyone actually cared in either directed be blamed.

Yeah. I've seen how thick headed people can be here about heterosexual romance. I've seen how much worse they are with anything else. It's a bit sad.

Wait, so the staff banned horrible slash fiction and people are raging over it? Did I miss something? Shouldn't this be a good thing?

No, I'm sure most of us are against that. (After two weeks at Japanese camp I never want to here that term again. Uggh.) Heterosexual stories of that nature are banned too, believe me. What the forum people did is ban any story that even mentions homosexuality.

And "Homophobia" is not a silly term. People have died because of it.

No, I'm sure most of us are against that. (After two weeks at Japanese camp I never want to here that term again. Uggh.) Heterosexual stories of that nature are banned too, believe me. What the forum people did is ban any story that even mentions homosexuality.

And "Homophobia" is not a silly term. People have died because of it.

I said it's silly because anytime anybody disagrees with homosexuality, "homophobia" is thrown around and people get in trouble because people accuse others of a crime that's not committed. Let's say you disagree with me, so I tell everyone that you cause public disturbances and break the law. It's not fair to you, right? So that's why I call it a silly term, because it is so...unnecessary and destructive. So far a few people have had to write a disclaimer to make sure we don't get burnt by the term.

And no one can say that a lot of people disagree with this rule. In any case, the people who feel strongly about this are going to speak up. That's probably what got this rule put in place. A vocal minority that does not like homosexuality. However, it's good to remember that there's only a vocal minority that does not like this rule. We can't say that because there are a lot of complaints about the rule that most people don't want it. There's probably just a vocal minority against the rule. I'm sure that most people just don't care. Just something to keep in mind.

So Matt Shepard died because of a "silly term"?

I not saying everybody who disagrees with homosexuality is a homophobe. I've always thought homophobia to be very strong and very hateful. Even so, homophobia isn't against the law, but hate crimes are. Our GSA posters get torn down every year because of it. People at out college got hate mail containing real threats because of it. That's like saying antisemitism is a silly term.

And if removing this rule wouldn't cause some huge civil war, why have it in the first place?

We have the rule now because the admins and mods value order over individual rights. Not because they hate you (pl.) or anything, but because too many rights leads to disorder. Disorder on a message board often leads to wasted space. Space costs money. Because the higher ups pay a lot for this, they would rather not see it wasted over individual rights that could potentially cause large conflicts (people have died over this, as you said. Therefore, there is potential for huge conflicts).

The point about the term being silly, is that people do start to throw it around and hurt people who really intended no harm. They simply had a differing opinion. That's the concept I was referring to. As for the concept that the word actually describes, everyone dislikes difference and change to some extent. People need know that it effects everyone else and build upon the experience. Everyone faces discrimination, it's not something that one or two groups face. It is an ongoing problem.

But at some point, the higher ups, be it the government or the admins, have to decide which laws they need and which they don't. They know that whatever they do will discriminate somebody and make someone somewhere upset, but at the end of the day they need to do something. This is something. To keep the boards here clear, to keep the uncaring majority unaffected by the rants of two minorities, and to save money and time for the people working to keep this site in shape, this rule was made. Yes, it discriminates. Yes, it makes people unhappy. But so do other rules.

If it bothers you that much that you can't write a homosexual story about a kid's toy on a kid's website, wait two weeks and see if you actually care. No alarms or calendar appointments. Just see if you can remember on your own. If you're still angry, write a polite letter explaining your troubles to the higher ups. If not, then you really didn't care and this really didn't affect you as much as you thought it did.

Aww. Now I can't do that Kopaka and Tahu story I was gonna.

Oh whatever, I only do them for the fun of the reactions anyway =P

Yo, Lyg, you should prolly lock this.