I think you misunderstand the point I was making. I was demonstrating that you can view your argument from two separate points. It could be a statement either way; if they did or did nothing. Not telling you what to think - but rather showing you how others might see it.
What did I say that you were quoting there? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
So you'd want them to say; "No, we aren't going to remove gender lock on old items", but rather "We aren't going to make any more gender locked items"?
How is this not a statement? I'm just curious on your views on the subject more than anything. I feel that it's mostly 2-3 people that feel this is political. Everyone just wants to look cute, and #frecklemybody.
I did not say that they should not make any more gender locked items, I said they should make less. You seem to be in the habit of misrepresenting me and my opinion. I also have not suggested Nexon say anything, just start releasing clothes as gender neutral where it makes sense to do so. Once again you're constructing a strawman to attempt to argue with, which is starting to seem dishonest.
I see that Arwoo used the "We" sentiment in the post. I can see how it can be viewed as it was. I didn't go back to read the whole post he made, only the selected snip from you. He himself would have to clarify but I sense two tones in the message myself - and believe that the use of "We" and "I" referred to his opinion / Nexon. He's said before that he uses the "We" when referring to the team.
It doesn't make a difference if it's a statement on behalf of Nexon or a personal statement from them. I did not say that Nexon saw it as a political statement, I said a Nexon representative saw it as a potential political statement. Please note, Nexon representative =/= Nexon.
I am against an update like this for the same reason I supported the Donald Trump npc being removed from the game. I don't believe Nexon should be striving to make updates and add content that makes a political statement as an update like this certainly would.
My thoughts exactly, it's a 2d universe. Aesthetics plays no real role in the gameplay. and i would include that suggestions like these dont improve the game play, id say the suggestions that should be taken into account are those that better the game or resolve obstacles servers face, for example theres a suggestion to add buff freezers in the reboot world, those are suggestions that affect the state if the game.
I would understand Donald Trump is something rather controversial and I can see your opinions why you would be against it. We absolutely don't need to dig further than that and I would avoid as much as possible for a potential reason for thread-lock.
I am against all political statements from Nexon, yes.
If there was any political statement, as a Canadian I would say we have the freedom to what we can wear as long as it doesn't break the Public Indecency laws. But that's not the point I'm making here.
In terms of gender restriction in game is ridiculous. In the real world the only restrictions are there is size and the norms set by society. People can judge you for what you wear but at the end of the day it's up to the said person what they want to do with their life. I honestly believe that we should either make all items gender neutral or having a complete bypass for item gender to be implemented.
All you're doing here is reaffirming your opinion, I have no doubt that it is your opinion, but you've got given any reason for your proposed change. I have no doubt that is is your opinion, which I have already disagreed with.
There are many benefits to Nexon implementing this such as more sales towards cosmetic NX clothes and Fusion Anvils. It may not improve something in terms of the power gap between the average and end-game, but it does affect the quality of life with the current massive restrictions of how each player wants to look. You simply just can't say, "this suggestion is invalid because this suggestion is more important". I can pretty much as well say, "well you already lived a life without Buff Freezers so obviously you can continue to do so". Sure you can backfire with, "game mechanics versus cosmetics", but that's not the point I'm trying to make here.
You have no data to support that claim, it could just as feasibly lower sales, because people would have to roll less to get something they might be happy with.
To be clear, I'm not actually forwarding that as a position, since neither of us have any data to support the claim that it would increase/decrease sales.
I believe all suggestions have an equal right to be reviewed and can only be shot down for a proper reason in relation to the suggestion. Turning all items gender neutral has nothing in common towards adding buff freezers into Reboot besides both being popular suggestions held up by the player community. In fact I believe we should respect both as options of suggestions, not shooting each other down to make one inferior to another.
I don't think anyone has suggested that this thread isn't a suggestion and that people should not be free to make said suggestion, I'm not sure where you get that idea from and I apologize if I have in any way given you that impression. I would like to make it perfectly clear that people are of course welcome to make suggestions I don't agree with.
This is a game and I would much prefer people to "cosplay" or "dress down" to their full content. It has nothing to do about the impact of the real world but it has impact towards of us the players in the game. There's nothing political about gender restrictions but it is a barrier of the past MapleStory that many would prefer gone. Sure maybe there will be weird looks, but change here would make options more relaxed and more uniqueness in the community.
My primary contention would be that it would be seen as a political statement, which I am against Nexon making. Considering multiple people on this thread alone already view the concept as a political statement you can't forward the idea that it would not be seen as a political statement, because it already has been.
Nexon already made the "political statement" when they released "April Fool's" hair and faces, and allow people to keep wearing them year-round.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
What I am asking is not related to politics or cross-dressing at all. It's just a little bit more like the real world has been for many years, since long before the current liberals. In the real world you can walk into any clothing store and buy whatever you have the means to pay for. And as long as the item is not too small for you to fit into, and covers your private parts, you can wear it out in public, too. People might give you strange or disapproving looks for some of your choices, but the police isn't going to arrest you.
For Maple to be the same way is not "political".
It just solves the problem of items having unnecessary gender restrictions (like the freckles, or the ghost uniform), and issues like the fact that you can't anvil the androgynous CRA top and bottom to look more heteronormative.
Nexon already made the "political statement" when they released "April Fool's" hair and faces, and allow people to keep wearing them year-round.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
I don't believe any of your examples make political statements, if you're against all of them for that reason then I question your support for this threads suggestion. Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
You seem to be suggesting I have an issue with cross-dressing, I don't and have not suggested that I do.
I have also repeatedly started that I have no problem with future items being more gender neutral, like Arwoo suggested.
What I am asking is not related to politics or cross-dressing at all. It's just a little bit more like the real world has been for many years, since long before the current liberals. In the real world you can walk into any clothing store and buy whatever you have the means to pay for. And as long as the item is not too small for you to fit into, and covers your private parts, you can wear it out in public, too. People might give you strange or disapproving looks for some of your choices, but the police isn't going to arrest you.
For Maple to be the same way is not "political".
Obviously we disagree that it would/would not be seen as political. You can't make blanket statements about how people would interpret the potential update. It's quite possible that you mean nothing political by your championing of the idea, but that's quite frankly irrelevant.
Example:
Person 1: "Vote for x!"
Person 2: "Please don't bring politics here"
Person 1: "It's not political, I meant nothing political by it"
Person 2: "Your intention is irrelevant, people see it as a political statement so it is a political statement"
I have no doubt that some people would not see it as political, I also have no doubt that some people (myself included) would see it as a political statement, which is reason enough for me to think it should be avoided.
It just solves the problem of items having unnecessary gender restrictions (like the freckles, or the ghost uniform), and issues like the fact that you can't anvil the androgynous CRA top and bottom to look more heteronormative.
Please keep in mind that I have not disagreed with any one specific piece of gender locked content being made available to everyone, I'm sure there's specific examples we could agree on. That is however quite a bit different to a suggestion to eliminate gender completely. I do not believe that letting male characters have freckles would be seen as a political statement and would have no problem with such a suggestion.
Nexon already made the "political statement" when they released "April Fool's" hair and faces, and allow people to keep wearing them year-round.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
I don't believe any of your examples make political statements, if you're against all of them for that reason then I question your support for this threads suggestion. Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
You seem to be suggesting I have an issue with cross-dressing, I don't and have not suggested that I do.
I have also repeatedly started that I have no problem with future items being more gender neutral, like Arwoo suggested.
Then I don't understand what you see as political.
If not the endorsement of cross-dressing, then what?
What I am asking is not related to politics or cross-dressing at all. It's just a little bit more like the real world has been for many years, since long before the current liberals. In the real world you can walk into any clothing store and buy whatever you have the means to pay for. And as long as the item is not too small for you to fit into, and covers your private parts, you can wear it out in public, too. People might give you strange or disapproving looks for some of your choices, but the police isn't going to arrest you.
For Maple to be the same way is not "political".
Obviously we disagree that it would/would not be seen as political. You can't make blanket statements about how people would interpret the potential update. It's quite possible that you mean nothing political by your championing of the idea, but that's quite frankly irrelevant.
Example:
Person 1: "Vote for x!"
Person 2: "Please don't bring politics here"
Person 1: "It's not political, I meant nothing political by it"
Person 2: "Your intention is irrelevant, people see it as a political statement so it is a political statement"
I have no doubt that some people would not see it as political, I also have no doubt that some people (myself included) would see it as a political statement, which is reason enough for me to think it should be avoided.
"Vote for x!" is political by definition, since voting is politics.
Fashion is not politics. "Let me wear whatever I want, just like in the real world" is not politics, because it is not a political issue in the real world. Except maybe in Saudi Arabia.
It just solves the problem of items having unnecessary gender restrictions (like the freckles, or the ghost uniform), and issues like the fact that you can't anvil the androgynous CRA top and bottom to look more heteronormative.
Please keep in mind that I have not disagreed with any one specific piece of gender locked content being made available to everyone, I'm sure there's specific examples we could agree on. That is however quite a bit different to a suggestion to eliminate gender completely. I do not believe that letting male characters have freckles would be seen as a political statement and would have no problem with such a suggestion.
Why are there only "specific examples we could agree on", if you just said you had no issue with cross-dressing, and you also said Nexon's allowing cross-dressing is not political? Why not all items, then?
How about this compromise:
Characters will still have gender, but the check on whether the character is the right gender to wear certain equipment, hairstyle, or face, will be removed.
Nexon already made the "political statement" when they released "April Fool's" hair and faces, and allow people to keep wearing them year-round.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
I don't believe any of your examples make political statements, if you're against all of them for that reason then I question your support for this threads suggestion. Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
You seem to be suggesting I have an issue with cross-dressing, I don't and have not suggested that I do.
I have also repeatedly started that I have no problem with future items being more gender neutral, like Arwoo suggested.
Then I don't understand what you see as political.
If not the endorsement of cross-dressing, then what?
I said that I have no problem with cross-dressing, I have an issue with Nexon making a political statement. My personal opinion of cross dressing has nothing to do with my opinion that Nexon should avoid making political statements.
What I am asking is not related to politics or cross-dressing at all. It's just a little bit more like the real world has been for many years, since long before the current liberals. In the real world you can walk into any clothing store and buy whatever you have the means to pay for. And as long as the item is not too small for you to fit into, and covers your private parts, you can wear it out in public, too. People might give you strange or disapproving looks for some of your choices, but the police isn't going to arrest you.
For Maple to be the same way is not "political".
Obviously we disagree that it would/would not be seen as political. You can't make blanket statements about how people would interpret the potential update. It's quite possible that you mean nothing political by your championing of the idea, but that's quite frankly irrelevant.
Example:
Person 1: "Vote for x!"
Person 2: "Please don't bring politics here"
Person 1: "It's not political, I meant nothing political by it"
Person 2: "Your intention is irrelevant, people see it as a political statement so it is a political statement"
I have no doubt that some people would not see it as political, I also have no doubt that some people (myself included) would see it as a political statement, which is reason enough for me to think it should be avoided.
"Vote for x!" is political by definition, since voting is politics.
Fashion is not politics. "Let me wear whatever I want, just like in the real world" is not politics, because it is not a political issue in the real world. Except maybe in Saudi Arabia.
Fashion can absolutely be political. The idea that Gender is a social construct, Gender norms need to challenged etc, which an update like this would be seen to be supporting , would absolutely be seen as a political statement.
If you don't think that Gender identity and the like are not political issues then you've not been paying attention to the News. :P
It just solves the problem of items having unnecessary gender restrictions (like the freckles, or the ghost uniform), and issues like the fact that you can't anvil the androgynous CRA top and bottom to look more heteronormative.
Please keep in mind that I have not disagreed with any one specific piece of gender locked content being made available to everyone, I'm sure there's specific examples we could agree on. That is however quite a bit different to a suggestion to eliminate gender completely. I do not believe that letting male characters have freckles would be seen as a political statement and would have no problem with such a suggestion.
Why are there only "specific examples we could agree on", if you just said you had no issue with cross-dressing, and you also said Nexon's allowing cross-dressing is not political? Why not all items, then?
I said I view Nexon's current practice on cross-dressing as non-political, I also said that them changing that (with the potential update) would be seen as political, which is what I'm against. As I've already said, my personal beliefs are irrelevant.
Because some specific examples don't really concern Gender at all, like freckles.
To be clear, we don't agree on freckles. You think they're important and I don't care enough to object, there's a difference. :P
Also specific examples are on a small enough scale that I don't think it makes a statement by itself. I see a difference between:
"Freckles face changed to be unisex"
and
"We have removed Gender completely, everyone can wear everything"
How about this compromise:
Characters will still have gender, but the check on whether the character is the right gender to wear certain equipment, hairstyle, or face, will be removed.
Would make too much of a statement for me to support, for the reasons I've already given.
@Daxi , I seriously don't understand where you draw the line between a political statement and what is not a political statement.
"Males can wear this tutu and tiara set" is non political, but "males can wear whatever they want" is political?
@Daxi , I seriously don't understand where you draw the line between a political statement and what is not a political statement.
"Males can wear this tutu and tiara set" is non political, but "males can wear whatever they want" is political?
My issue is not with what people choose to wear, which to be clear can absolutely be political, but doesn't have to be, obviously. Even when a person makes the most overt political statement, I am more then happy for them to have their political beliefs and express them however they want.
With that said, there is a difference between a company and a person. I do not want Nexon to make content and updates which will be seen as supporting (or not supporting) specific hot-topic political issues.
I have only stated that I have no issue with cross dressing because it seems to have been implied that I had some issue with cross dressing and I want to correct the record, so to speak. However, my personal beliefs are irrelevant to my reasons for not wanting Gender to be removed from Maplestory.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
Person 1: We should bulldoze the town!
Person 2: I don't think that's a good idea
Person 1: But that house is decrepit and is a health risk, it needs to go!
Person 2: That's not a reason to bulldoze a town, I'm sure we could agree on specific houses to bulldozer instead
Person 1: But you agree that the house needs to be bulldozed, so why don't you agree that the town needs to go???
@Daxi , I seriously don't understand where you draw the line between a political statement and what is not a political statement.
"Males can wear this tutu and tiara set" is non political, but "males can wear whatever they want" is political?
My issue is not with what people choose to wear, which to be clear can absolutely be political, but doesn't have to be, obviously. Even when a person makes the most overt political statement, I am more then happy for them to have their political beliefs and express them however they want.
With that said, there is a difference between a company and a person. I do not want Nexon to make content and updates which will be seen as supporting (or not supporting) specific hot-topic political issues.
I have only stated that I have no issue with cross dressing because it seems to have been implied that I had some issue with cross dressing and I want to correct the record, so to speak. However, my personal beliefs are irrelevant to my reasons for not wanting Gender to be removed from Maplestory.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
You are evading the question.
I'm not asking about your personal opinion on cross-dressing.
You said you object to Nexon making political statements.
I said Nexon has already made such statements by releasing such items as beards and wedding dresses as gender-neutral.
You claimed that was not a political statement.
I said, well then, they can make all cosmetic items gender-neutral.
You said that would be a political statement.
So I am trying to understand where you, personally, draw the line between a political statement (that a company should avoid) and non-political actions.
You are evading the question.
I'm not asking about your personal opinion on cross-dressing.
You said you object to Nexon making political statements.
I said Nexon has already made such statements by releasing such items as beards and wedding dresses as gender-neutral.
You claimed that was not a political statement.
I said, well then, they can make all cosmetic items gender-neutral.
You said that would be a political statement.
Hard to 'evade' a question they I've already answered.
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
So I am trying to understand where you, personally, draw the line between a political statement (that a company should avoid) and non-political actions.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
You are evading the question.
I'm not asking about your personal opinion on cross-dressing.
You said you object to Nexon making political statements.
I said Nexon has already made such statements by releasing such items as beards and wedding dresses as gender-neutral.
You claimed that was not a political statement.
I said, well then, they can make all cosmetic items gender-neutral.
You said that would be a political statement.
Hard to 'evade' a question they I've already answered.
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
Nexon already made the "political statement" when they released "April Fool's" hair and faces, and allow people to keep wearing them year-round.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
I don't believe any of your examples make political statements.
If they have made a political statement on this topic in the past, then unless you want them to withdraw those statements (by way of removing the "cross dressing" items from the game or assigning them to their heteronormative gender), those statements continue to stand. And be made anew every time one of those items is re-released (including every April 1st).
So it makes no sense to tell them, "Don't make any more statements that reaffirm the ones you already made and continue to make."
This is what I meant by "That ship has sailed."
Also, one might argue that by creating a game in which gender has no effect on stats or skills, they made an even stronger political statement. Should that be withdrawn as well?
No, but I'll add in the word "significant" if you really want. I would have thought it to be self evident that I was referring to significant political statements, since everything can be seen as a political statement.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
I don't believe any of your examples make significant political statements.
Fixed it for you. Arguing minutia doesn't progress the conversation since it doesn't counter my points nor progress any of your own.
Person 1: I don't like Mondays
Person 2: But you got married on a Monday! Plus you said you enjoyed all of your time in France, you were there for 3 Mondays! Are you going to take back that you don't like Mondays???
Person 1: You're kidding right?
If they have made a political statement on this topic in the past, then unless you want them to withdraw those statements (by way of removing the "cross dressing" items from the game or assigning them to their heteronormative gender), those statements continue to stand. And be made anew every time one of those items is re-released (including every April 1st).
So it makes no sense to tell them, "Don't make any more statements that reaffirm the ones you already made and continue to make."
This is what I meant by "That ship has sailed."
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
Worth pointing out that I disagree with your conclusion.
Also, one might argue that by creating a game in which gender has no effect on stats or skills, they made an even stronger political statement. Should that be withdrawn as well?
But I didn't.. lol. Constructing a position I never forwarded to try and argue with it is a strawman fallacy.
So, we're back to square one: how do you define significant political statements and where do you draw the line?
I draw the line at content that even when suggested causes 6+ pages of kerfuffles, anything between 1-3 would be acceptable!
That's obviously a flippant answer, but highlights that even the suggestion has caused (albeit well meaning, at least from me) drama. Which is exactly what I want to avoid.
Novelty hairs on April 1st and the like do not have the same impact as eliminating Gender and do not say the same political statement.
I have said multiple times that I do not want Nexon to make any political statements about hot-topic issues. I'm not sure how many times you want me to give you the exact same answer.
I think you misunderstand the point I was making. I was demonstrating that you can view your argument from two separate points. It could be a statement either way; if they did or did nothing. Not telling you what to think - but rather showing you how others might see it.
What did I say that you were quoting there? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Welcome back, still waiting for your clarification here from before. I will address your most recent reply too though:
I'm having the same issue - what exactly this person considers a political statement is beyond me. It looks like literally, anything they've done isn't a statement, but doing something now is a statement.
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
One could argue that by not allowing any character to marry unless one is Male and one is Female was also a statement.
The fact that they refer to "Gods", is another statement - since some religions specifically say that having more than one God blasphemy
The fact that Zero is both male and female.. is another statement.
The fact you can cross dress with certain items.. is another
The fact that you don't have parents that made you, but rather you chose your eyes, hair etc at creation is.. another statement
The fact that you can divorce is ... another statement
Sure, someone could argue those points, but I have not argued those points. You sure are a fan of strawman fallacies. :P
Please give a clear definition of exactly what is wrong with people wanting this because I do not understand, and it appears that other also, do not understand what the point you're making is. They've already "Made a Statement" by allowing this already.
I am against an update like this for the same reason I supported the Donald Trump npc being removed from the game. I don't believe Nexon should be striving to make updates and add content that makes a political statement as an update like this certainly would.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
The pages of kerflufles are you basically saying "I don't want Nexon to say the thing" and refusing to explain what, exactly, said "thing" is. And us (mostly me) trying to get you to say outright what this political statement you want to avoid, is. Because obviously "pixel sprites in a 2D side-scroller game can be assembled any way the user wants" is not a political statement. You need to translate it into something in real-world-society terms, because that's where the politics is.
I tried to figure out what the statement is, but I can't read your mind, and you refuse to clarify.
Is the statement, that you object to Nexon making, "People can wear whatever they like, regardless of gender"?
If not, what is?
The pages of kerflufles are you basically saying "I don't want Nexon to say the thing" and refusing to explain what, exactly, said "thing" is. And us (mostly me) trying to get you to say outright what this political statement you want to avoid, is. Because obviously "pixel sprites in a 2D side-scroller game can be assembled any way the user wants" is not a political statement. You need to translate it into something in real-world-society terms, because that's where the politics is.
I said directly after I said it that it was a flippant answer, you're arguing what I said in the very post it was made was a joke, lol.
I believe I have explained in detail what I mean when I say that I don't want Nexon to be making political statements.
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements
For clarification about the above, I'm obviously meaning significant statements.
I believe dismantling the idea of Gender in Maplestory makes a significant political statement, which I believe should be avoided. Maybe in a few years it will be less potentially controversial, we can hope anyway.
Define Significant, because what your arguing makes zero sense.
You just keep saying you're not arguing specific points while being so vague nobody understands you.
Significant - adjective - Important; of consequence.
It seems unlikely that no one understands me, especially considering support has been posted for my original post.
None of this is making a political statement, I'm not sure if you're too blinded by your argument - but this is a pixelated world, in a video game, that has fairies, and monsters, and demons. It has pigs that talk, and magic, and you can already be whomever you want.
Companies can absolutely make political statements with content they add to their game. Nexon acknowledges this with the patch notes for the removal of the Donald Trump npc.
Nexon NA permits Gay marriage in Mabinogi. Here a link referencing this change being in a singular region only. They have made a statement regarding the wider acceptance of different people.
Your argument is honestly something I would of expecting in the early 2000's, not in 2017.
I have made no comment about same sex marriage at all and as a member of the LGBTQA+ community I resent the implication. Please stop building strawmen to try and argue with, it's starting to seem like you're intentionally doing it now.
As I've stated many times, I have no personal issue whatsoever with cross-dressing. I simply do not believe Nexon should be making unnecessarily large, potentially divisive, significant political statements. If people want to cross dress with whatever is already available and Nexon is willing to be more considerate with future updates then great, I'm happy with both.
I've been following this thread for a while now, and I'm honestly confused at what you, @Daxi, are trying to get across. You've repeatedly said that your intentions are clear, but if so, why is everyone in the argument asking for clarification?
You've also repeatedly said that people are "building strawmen" the only reason why it feels like that in the first place is because no one understands what your point is!
Also: Why the heck do you care what "political statements" Nexon makes? It's their business, their prerogative. That seems to be what started this whole thing anyways. You've said it before, you may not agree with Nexon's previous statements, but they're free to make them.
I get that you disagree with the suggestion, but you need to stop saying, "I don't think nexon should make x political statement" and replace it with "I don't agree with x political statement". What you think Nexon should, and shouldn't do, has no merit on this discussion.
I've been following this thread for a while now, and I'm honestly confused at what you, @Daxi, are trying to get across. You've repeatedly said that your intentions are clear, but if so, why is everyone in the argument asking for clarification?
All 2 of them? 3 with you. :P
I am against the suggestion because I believe it would make a political statement that I don't think Nexon should make, while personally I have no issue with people cross dressing. I am against it for the same reason I was in support of Donald Trump being removed. I do not know how I can make that any clearer for people.
You've also repeatedly said that people are "building strawmen" the only reason why it feels like that in the first place is because no one understands what your point is!
It was most recently implied that I had an issue with same sex marriage and that my thinking about same sex marriage was something the person would have expected from over a decade ago. I not once mentioned same sex marriage. It was a strawman fallacy by definition.
Also: Why the heck do you care what "political statements" Nexon makes? It's their business, their prerogative. That seems to be what started this whole thing anyways. You've said it before, you may not agree with Nexon's previous statements, but they're free to make them.
We're literally on the suggestions and feedback section of the forums, literally implemented for the playerbase to tell Nexon how they believe they should spend their time. Nexon is of course free to make potentially divisive political statements if they want, I just don't believe they should.
"Nexon can do what they want" is an accurate statement, but not helpful to this conversation and invalidates this entire forum section, lol. :P
I have never once claimed that Nexon is not allowed to make whatever political statements they want, please don't misrepresent me.
I get that you disagree with the suggestion, but you need to stop saying, "I don't think nexon should make x political statement" and replace it with "I don't agree with x political statement". What you think Nexon should, and shouldn't do, has no merit on this discussion.
I have stated multiple times that I personally have no problem with cross dressing. My disagreement of the suggestion is due to my belief that companies should avoid potentially divisive political statements.
To say "I don't agree with x political statement" would be a lie, where x equals the political statements discussed in this thread.
To say "I don't agree with x political statement" would be a lie, where x equals the political statements discussed in this thread.
I still wish I knew what "x" is.
I feel like I'm in that ancient skit, "Who's on First".
"I'm against Nexon making significant political statements."
"What statement do you think they'd be making by doing this?"
"A significant one."
"No, I meant, what is the statement that would be implied by allowing characters to wear what they want?"
"A significant and potentially divisive one, which I agree with but don't think Nexon should make."
"Can you rephrase the statement?"
"I already did, multiple times."
Fashion can absolutely be political. The idea that Gender is a social construct, Gender norms need to challenged etc, which an update like this would be seen to be supporting , would absolutely be seen as a political statement.
If you don't think that Gender identity and the like are not political issues then you've not been paying attention to the News. :P
Comments
What did I say that you were quoting there? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
I did not say that they should not make any more gender locked items, I said they should make less. You seem to be in the habit of misrepresenting me and my opinion. I also have not suggested Nexon say anything, just start releasing clothes as gender neutral where it makes sense to do so. Once again you're constructing a strawman to attempt to argue with, which is starting to seem dishonest.
It doesn't make a difference if it's a statement on behalf of Nexon or a personal statement from them. I did not say that Nexon saw it as a political statement, I said a Nexon representative saw it as a potential political statement. Please note, Nexon representative =/= Nexon.
I am against all political statements from Nexon, yes.
All you're doing here is reaffirming your opinion, I have no doubt that it is your opinion, but you've got given any reason for your proposed change. I have no doubt that is is your opinion, which I have already disagreed with.
You have no data to support that claim, it could just as feasibly lower sales, because people would have to roll less to get something they might be happy with.
To be clear, I'm not actually forwarding that as a position, since neither of us have any data to support the claim that it would increase/decrease sales.
Covered here:
My primary contention would be that it would be seen as a political statement, which I am against Nexon making. Considering multiple people on this thread alone already view the concept as a political statement you can't forward the idea that it would not be seen as a political statement, because it already has been.
They made the "political statement" when they released the White Swan and Black Swan ballerina sets, with no gender restriction, after those sets had already been available in female-only versions.
Basically, they already said they are fine with people cross-dressing their characters, and will gladly make money by catering to them.
So, that ship has sailed.
What I am asking is not related to politics or cross-dressing at all. It's just a little bit more like the real world has been for many years, since long before the current liberals. In the real world you can walk into any clothing store and buy whatever you have the means to pay for. And as long as the item is not too small for you to fit into, and covers your private parts, you can wear it out in public, too. People might give you strange or disapproving looks for some of your choices, but the police isn't going to arrest you.
For Maple to be the same way is not "political".
It just solves the problem of items having unnecessary gender restrictions (like the freckles, or the ghost uniform), and issues like the fact that you can't anvil the androgynous CRA top and bottom to look more heteronormative.
I don't believe any of your examples make political statements, if you're against all of them for that reason then I question your support for this threads suggestion. Regardless, I am against Nexon making political statements, I am not saying Nexon has never made a political statement before, nor that I support every political statement Nexon has ever potentially made, so your point is moot.
You seem to be suggesting I have an issue with cross-dressing, I don't and have not suggested that I do.
I have also repeatedly started that I have no problem with future items being more gender neutral, like Arwoo suggested.
Obviously we disagree that it would/would not be seen as political. You can't make blanket statements about how people would interpret the potential update. It's quite possible that you mean nothing political by your championing of the idea, but that's quite frankly irrelevant.
Example:
Person 1: "Vote for x!"
Person 2: "Please don't bring politics here"
Person 1: "It's not political, I meant nothing political by it"
Person 2: "Your intention is irrelevant, people see it as a political statement so it is a political statement"
I have no doubt that some people would not see it as political, I also have no doubt that some people (myself included) would see it as a political statement, which is reason enough for me to think it should be avoided.
I answered that already:
Then I don't understand what you see as political.
If not the endorsement of cross-dressing, then what?
"Vote for x!" is political by definition, since voting is politics.
Fashion is not politics. "Let me wear whatever I want, just like in the real world" is not politics, because it is not a political issue in the real world. Except maybe in Saudi Arabia.
Why are there only "specific examples we could agree on", if you just said you had no issue with cross-dressing, and you also said Nexon's allowing cross-dressing is not political? Why not all items, then?
How about this compromise:
Characters will still have gender, but the check on whether the character is the right gender to wear certain equipment, hairstyle, or face, will be removed.
I said that I have no problem with cross-dressing, I have an issue with Nexon making a political statement. My personal opinion of cross dressing has nothing to do with my opinion that Nexon should avoid making political statements.
Fashion can absolutely be political. The idea that Gender is a social construct, Gender norms need to challenged etc, which an update like this would be seen to be supporting , would absolutely be seen as a political statement.
If you don't think that Gender identity and the like are not political issues then you've not been paying attention to the News. :P
I said I view Nexon's current practice on cross-dressing as non-political, I also said that them changing that (with the potential update) would be seen as political, which is what I'm against. As I've already said, my personal beliefs are irrelevant.
Because some specific examples don't really concern Gender at all, like freckles.
To be clear, we don't agree on freckles. You think they're important and I don't care enough to object, there's a difference. :P
Also specific examples are on a small enough scale that I don't think it makes a statement by itself. I see a difference between:
"Freckles face changed to be unisex"
and
"We have removed Gender completely, everyone can wear everything"
Would make too much of a statement for me to support, for the reasons I've already given.
"Males can wear this tutu and tiara set" is non political, but "males can wear whatever they want" is political?
My issue is not with what people choose to wear, which to be clear can absolutely be political, but doesn't have to be, obviously. Even when a person makes the most overt political statement, I am more then happy for them to have their political beliefs and express them however they want.
With that said, there is a difference between a company and a person. I do not want Nexon to make content and updates which will be seen as supporting (or not supporting) specific hot-topic political issues.
I have only stated that I have no issue with cross dressing because it seems to have been implied that I had some issue with cross dressing and I want to correct the record, so to speak. However, my personal beliefs are irrelevant to my reasons for not wanting Gender to be removed from Maplestory.
Obviously everything can be interpreted as a political statement to varying degrees. Which is why I have less of an issue with less overt changes, such as future Gender restriction consideration (where reasonable) or a limited pool of specific changes to existing content.
Person 1: We should bulldoze the town!
Person 2: I don't think that's a good idea
Person 1: But that house is decrepit and is a health risk, it needs to go!
Person 2: That's not a reason to bulldoze a town, I'm sure we could agree on specific houses to bulldozer instead
Person 1: But you agree that the house needs to be bulldozed, so why don't you agree that the town needs to go???
You are evading the question.
I'm not asking about your personal opinion on cross-dressing.
You said you object to Nexon making political statements.
I said Nexon has already made such statements by releasing such items as beards and wedding dresses as gender-neutral.
You claimed that was not a political statement.
I said, well then, they can make all cosmetic items gender-neutral.
You said that would be a political statement.
So I am trying to understand where you, personally, draw the line between a political statement (that a company should avoid) and non-political actions.
Hard to 'evade' a question they I've already answered.
So you're taking the bolded (by me) part back?
If they have made a political statement on this topic in the past, then unless you want them to withdraw those statements (by way of removing the "cross dressing" items from the game or assigning them to their heteronormative gender), those statements continue to stand. And be made anew every time one of those items is re-released (including every April 1st).
So it makes no sense to tell them, "Don't make any more statements that reaffirm the ones you already made and continue to make."
This is what I meant by "That ship has sailed."
Also, one might argue that by creating a game in which gender has no effect on stats or skills, they made an even stronger political statement. Should that be withdrawn as well?
No, but I'll add in the word "significant" if you really want. I would have thought it to be self evident that I was referring to significant political statements, since everything can be seen as a political statement.
Fixed it for you. Arguing minutia doesn't progress the conversation since it doesn't counter my points nor progress any of your own.
Person 1: I don't like Mondays
Person 2: But you got married on a Monday! Plus you said you enjoyed all of your time in France, you were there for 3 Mondays! Are you going to take back that you don't like Mondays???
Person 1: You're kidding right?
Worth pointing out that I disagree with your conclusion.
But I didn't.. lol. Constructing a position I never forwarded to try and argue with it is a strawman fallacy.
I draw the line at content that even when suggested causes 6+ pages of kerfuffles, anything between 1-3 would be acceptable!
That's obviously a flippant answer, but highlights that even the suggestion has caused (albeit well meaning, at least from me) drama. Which is exactly what I want to avoid.
Novelty hairs on April 1st and the like do not have the same impact as eliminating Gender and do not say the same political statement.
I have said multiple times that I do not want Nexon to make any political statements about hot-topic issues. I'm not sure how many times you want me to give you the exact same answer.
Welcome back, still waiting for your clarification here from before. I will address your most recent reply too though:
Sure, someone could argue those points, but I have not argued those points. You sure are a fan of strawman fallacies. :P
Certainly:
I tried to figure out what the statement is, but I can't read your mind, and you refuse to clarify.
Is the statement, that you object to Nexon making, "People can wear whatever they like, regardless of gender"?
If not, what is?
I said directly after I said it that it was a flippant answer, you're arguing what I said in the very post it was made was a joke, lol.
I believe I have explained in detail what I mean when I say that I don't want Nexon to be making political statements.
Clarification again:
For clarification about the above, I'm obviously meaning significant statements.
I believe dismantling the idea of Gender in Maplestory makes a significant political statement, which I believe should be avoided. Maybe in a few years it will be less potentially controversial, we can hope anyway.
Significant - adjective - Important; of consequence.
It seems unlikely that no one understands me, especially considering support has been posted for my original post.
Companies can absolutely make political statements with content they add to their game. Nexon acknowledges this with the patch notes for the removal of the Donald Trump npc.
I have made no comment about same sex marriage at all and as a member of the LGBTQA+ community I resent the implication. Please stop building strawmen to try and argue with, it's starting to seem like you're intentionally doing it now.
As I've stated many times, I have no personal issue whatsoever with cross-dressing. I simply do not believe Nexon should be making unnecessarily large, potentially divisive, significant political statements. If people want to cross dress with whatever is already available and Nexon is willing to be more considerate with future updates then great, I'm happy with both.
You've also repeatedly said that people are "building strawmen" the only reason why it feels like that in the first place is because no one understands what your point is!
Also: Why the heck do you care what "political statements" Nexon makes? It's their business, their prerogative. That seems to be what started this whole thing anyways. You've said it before, you may not agree with Nexon's previous statements, but they're free to make them.
I get that you disagree with the suggestion, but you need to stop saying, "I don't think nexon should make x political statement" and replace it with "I don't agree with x political statement". What you think Nexon should, and shouldn't do, has no merit on this discussion.
All 2 of them? 3 with you. :P
I am against the suggestion because I believe it would make a political statement that I don't think Nexon should make, while personally I have no issue with people cross dressing. I am against it for the same reason I was in support of Donald Trump being removed. I do not know how I can make that any clearer for people.
It was most recently implied that I had an issue with same sex marriage and that my thinking about same sex marriage was something the person would have expected from over a decade ago. I not once mentioned same sex marriage. It was a strawman fallacy by definition.
We're literally on the suggestions and feedback section of the forums, literally implemented for the playerbase to tell Nexon how they believe they should spend their time. Nexon is of course free to make potentially divisive political statements if they want, I just don't believe they should.
"Nexon can do what they want" is an accurate statement, but not helpful to this conversation and invalidates this entire forum section, lol. :P
I have never once claimed that Nexon is not allowed to make whatever political statements they want, please don't misrepresent me.
I have stated multiple times that I personally have no problem with cross dressing. My disagreement of the suggestion is due to my belief that companies should avoid potentially divisive political statements.
To say "I don't agree with x political statement" would be a lie, where x equals the political statements discussed in this thread.
I still wish I knew what "x" is.
I feel like I'm in that ancient skit, "Who's on First".
"I'm against Nexon making significant political statements."
"What statement do you think they'd be making by doing this?"
"A significant one."
"No, I meant, what is the statement that would be implied by allowing characters to wear what they want?"
"A significant and potentially divisive one, which I agree with but don't think Nexon should make."
"Can you rephrase the statement?"
"I already did, multiple times."
I give up.