Hitler Car Reveals Microsoft's 'Homosexual Status' User Policy
The recent 'Heil Hitler' car snafu that caused so much ruckus with the Forza 2 paintjob editor uncovered a definite oddment in Microsoft's Live Online User Policy. James Ransom-Wiley at Joystiq found a strangely-worded portion of the policy that, while ostensibly intended to protect gays, definitely strays from the fairly widely-recognized standard language for discussions of sexual orientation.
Microsoft's Live Online User Policy words its anti-discrimination position thus:
'[Users may not] Publish, distribute or disseminate any topic, name, material, file or information that incites discrimination, hate, or violence towards one person or a group because of their race, religion, nationality, transgender status, homosexual status, or HIV/AIDS status, or that insults the victims of crimes against humanity by contesting the existence of those crimes.”
The wording that alarmed Joystiq was of course the use of "homosexual status" rather than the more routine (and egalitarian) "sexual orientation." It's important to note that the language as it's set forth is intended to protect gays from offensive or hateful acts, but we're all still a little befuddled as to why the language sounds so backward.
In fact, it's rather more than backward: "On Time," "Delayed," and "Boarding" are designations of status - homosexuality is an aspect of human sexuality. Assuming that homosexuality is a "status" goes far beyond the provenance of Microsoft and an online user policy, and describes homosexuality as a thing that is either on or off - completely ignoring the question of bisexuality, and demarcates gays as a kind of "special" group. We know that Microsoft is trying to be the good guy with this, but is a semantic debate over the nature of homosexuality really a conversation they want to initiate?
The much less contentious alternative would be to simply say that discrimination against "sexual orientation" of any kind is verboten and give bisexuals and heterosexuals (and anyone else) equal protection. As the language reads now, one could run around calling every straight person a "breeder," while being protected from the rejoinder of "faggot." Not that anyone needs to be called a faggot, of course, but there's absolutely no reason I can think of not to extend equal protection to everyone, and every reason to repair what is a potentially offensive and divisive bit of language from the Live Online User Policy.
'Heil Hitler' car auctioned in Forza 2, exposes kink in user-generated gaming [Joystiq]
tiny dancer
Posted to Hot Stuff, Video Games on 5 July 2007
· Comments (9)
Other stuff like this: forza 2, hitler car, homosexual status, live online user policy, microsoft, xbox 360
Theoretically, calling straight people "Breeders" is still discriminating based on "homosexual status" (in their case the status is simply "off" or "not"). But still, it's weird wording.
Wierd wording, but I reckon some buffoon writing it in legal speak rather than any intended discrimination, or maybe I'm naive
I think you're reaching a bit. I think that homosexual status actually fits well for a lot of people because its what you declare yourself as. If you are not a declared homosexual it wouldnt be your status to be one, even if you are.
A "status" can be more than true or false... I think it leaves room for both heterosexuals and bisexuals. I will agree that it's a weird wording, but I suspect that it's intended as an innocuous synonym.
Back to the car itself, a neo-nazi/white power guy invaded the Game Politics thread on the topic, and we had fun arguing with him until he vanished for the day. I'll never understand how those people think.
Hannah - I do agree that it's intended to be innocuous, 100%. In fact it's very clearly intended to protect homosexuals; there's just no reason why it can't protect people of any and all sexual orientations. It seems to me that part of the process of social progress includes close examination of the language we use to describe groups of people.
Protection against discrimination in regards to sexual orientation is a pretty standard idea and pretty standard language. This just seems like an easily-addressed bit of sloppiness that might otherwise cause problems, someday, somehow.
People, let's not ignore that it also says "transgender status", which is equally silly.
my guess is that they didn't use "sexual orientation", because they figured that the typical 13 year old wouldn't understand it. so they chose some thing that they thought they would get
Pholtus, I think you're right on the money with that one. A *lot* of kids play this sort of stuff, and I've had people question me on the definition of "retort." Somehow, I think that "orientation" is a bit over their heads, especially when it isn't the first meeting you go to during school.
Transgender status makes a lot more sense, since one person can have several of them over the course of their transition (not transgendered at all, whatever the status is where you're not on hormones yet but you're already trying to pass, pre-op, and post-op.) There's no "on" or "off" about it.
"Homosexual status" is just goofy, like something you'd hear Kevin Nealon's TV reporter character from Jeffrey say.