Striving for equality: Why Bulbagarden is taking a pro-LGBTQ stance

[Iteru]

Pokémon, especially the Black and White games, were aimed for adults as well as children (stated by Masuda, I can get you a source if you'd like). Nonetheless, children in their early teens are starting/may already be aware of their sexuality and we think that it's important for our members to have a place where they can discuss all topics (our forum has sections devoted to many non-Pokemon topics) without fear of seeing discussion that is demeaning/discriminating to who they are.

For our members under 13 years old, they need parental consent to make an account here, so for those not within their teen years parents do have a form of control.

 

[Eevee]

It is an 'Editorial', not a regular news article. Just like columns and opinion pieces.

Well, obviously I have the feed embedded on the front page of another site (in lieu of trying to be yet another news source), and in that context this article is wildly out of place and fairly confusing. Somehow it manages to have the longest summary of any item I've ever seen in the feed, too.

Sexuality (of whatever stripe) is not an apropriate topic of discussion for a site which focuses on a video game marketed to early teens. I strongly urge bulba* staff to keep the site pokemon focused and sexually/politically silent. "Pro-whatever" is not apropriate for a children's game.

Early teens are precisely the people least likely to know where to turn if they discover something about themselves that's not socially accepted in their area. Making this an explicitly safe space sure seems far more helpful than harmful to me. (There are already several posts in this thread with relevant anecdotes.)

What's your concern here? Ten-year-olds will find out that sometimes boys like to go out with other boys?

 

[HumanDawn]

I'd be more in favor of your new policy if you ended it with the first paragraph: "...Bulbagarden, as a Pokémon fansite; shouldn't be taking [a] stance on political issues."

I, like many pokemon playing parents, use this site to stay competitive with (*ahem*, whup the stuffin out of) the neigborhood boys who play pokemon with my teenage daughters. It's great way to build relationships / assess character with the neighborhood kids.

Sexuality (of whatever stripe) is not an apropriate topic of discussion for a site which focuses on a video game marketed to early teens. I strongly urge bulba* staff to keep the site pokemon focused and sexually/politically silent. "Pro-whatever" is not apropriate for a children's game.

-Dad

On the contrary! By making this policy they're making it more sexually and politically silent by disallowing debates about LGBTs. There are young kids who come here that could even learn from this policy and possibly apply it to their lives therefore being more educated, tolerant, open-minded and nice to others despite differences.

 

[Joshawott]

I'd be more in favor of your new policy if you ended it with the first paragraph: "...Bulbagarden, as a Pokémon fansite; shouldn't be taking [a] stance on political issues."

I, like many pokemon playing parents, use this site to stay competitive with (*ahem*, whup the stuffin out of) the neigborhood boys who play pokemon with my teenage daughters. It's great way to build relationships / assess character with the neighborhood kids.

Sexuality (of whatever stripe) is not an apropriate topic of discussion for a site which focuses on a video game marketed to early teens. I strongly urge bulba* staff to keep the site pokemon focused and sexually/politically silent. "Pro-whatever" is not apropriate for a children's game.

-Dad

I do understand your concerns, but I would like to respectfully disagree. I personally believe that people of all ages should be made aware of such issues and that in reality, they shouldn't be issues at all.

I have a 7 year old brother and I am very active in his life and his development and both me and our Mum have put a firm stance on telling him that it is perfectly normal for someone to be of a different sexual orientation, gender, skin colour et cetera. There will come a time in someone's life when they will have to face these issues - sometimes indirectly through friends or other acquaintances, or even directly. If children are taught about it as early as possible, then it will hopefully lessen any distress it may cause if we simply do not address the issues right away.

I would also like to respectfully disagree with it not being an appropriate topic. Yes, Bulbagarden and Bulbapedia's main focus is the Pokémon series, you are quite right. However, it is also a community. With so many people joining this community from across the world, we simply cannot ignore issues that directly affect some members of real communities, big or small. As the article states as well, the internet can be a safe haven for those who are persecuted against in the "real world" and we need to let people know that they will be welcomed here, regardless of their sexuality.

That said, I don't believe that it's Bulbagarden or Bulbapedia's plan to become a politically themed website. This announcement was made in response to a vast number of distressing issues that the staff had to deal with recently on our forums. Honestly, the staff wished it never had to get the point where a public announcement had to be made, but it did.

 

[Garren]

The thing is, most sites inherently bring up topics of heteronormative sexuality though, and no one makes a big deal out of it because it's considered the "norm". But once you mention that, hey, people with alternate sexual orientations won't be discriminated when making a blog post discussing their same-sex boyfriend, it's instantly labeled as trying to put forward a certain sexual agenda, when in reality it's ensuring that members won't be bullied for sexual orientation.

Where were you during Boob Week?

 

[Eevee]

But once you mention that, hey, people with alternate sexual orientations won't be discriminated when making a blog post discussing their same-sex boyfriend, it's instantly labeled as trying to put forward a certain sexual agenda, when in reality it's ensuring that members won't be bullied for sexual orientation.

Something has gone terribly wrong when basic civility is interpreted as "political".

 

[The Outrage]

Alternate article title:

You know all those rules about being nice to others and not being a dick? Applies to gay-bashing too fyi.

 

[8BitPoipole]

I'm so happy about this. Let's hope it becomes a global law.
Homophobia and unacceptance of said should be completely illegal everywhere.
People have told me I'm wrong, and that I made a choice, and I'm so happy that somewhere I love is taking action against people like this.
So yeah, this makes me EXTREMELY happy.

 

[Rukario-kun]

Much of what I would have said has already been said by Nuvakat as far as the crucial differentiation between the act of homosexuality and the performers thereof and how each ought be treated as polar opposites; how anyone clearly presented with the concept can continue to be logically oblivious and dogmatically opposed to the idea is beyond me. I will, however, abstain from supporting any articles Nuvakat linked or anything this user has said in reference to said articles - but only because I've not taken the time to review them.

I will also throw my support behind user dademon in his concern for the countenance of his children. Sexuality and its deviants are things which ought only be taught about to children by their parents, not by a website otherwise devoted to Pokémon of all things. Yes, I understand that this is indeed the internet, and that such content is not scarce throughout, but it still stands as logical and right that this specific corner remain innocent and unbiased on the subject either way.

I strongly urge the higher-ups who make the policies in this community to refocus the issue onto the bullying of no specific target, rather than of homosexuals in particular.

 

[Musashi]

I will also throw my support behind user dademon in his concern for the countenance of his children. Sexuality and its deviants are things which ought only be taught about to children by their parents, not by a website otherwise devoted to Pokémon of all things. Yes, I understand that this is indeed the internet, and that such content is not scarce throughout, but it still stands as logical and right that this specific corner remain innocent and unbiased on the subject either way.

We're not teaching anyone about this. There's just going to be some support thread, and debating will only be allowed in a forum that requires approval before posting.

All we're saying is that bashing homosexuals is just as bad as people who are racists, sexists, etc. No one would except the latter, so why should the former be accepted?

 

[Bikini Miltank]

Sexuality (of whatever stripe) is not an apropriate topic of discussion for a site which focuses on a video game marketed to early teens. I strongly urge bulba* staff to keep the site pokemon focused and sexually/politically silent. "Pro-whatever" is not apropriate for a children's game.

And I wouldn't want my children to be exposed to an environment where bigotry was tolerated. It's bad for gay kids, obviously, but it's actually bad for all kids to see hatred excused as "debate".

And your point about sexuality not being an appropriate topic for kids only holds true if you believe that there's nothing more to it than the mechanics of the act of sex itself. There will be kids in these forums with gay parents, or with family members who want to get married to the person they love but are legally prevented from doing so. None of these things has much to do with sex. If you think these topics are inappropriate then we should also ban all discussion of marriage, or romance, or parents, because they all lead back to sex in the end!

All too often, when people say they think sexuality isn't an appropriate topic for kids, they only mean homosexuality.

 

[Rukario-kun]

I will also throw my support behind user dademon in his concern for the countenance of his children. Sexuality and its deviants are things which ought only be taught about to children by their parents, not by a website otherwise devoted to Pokémon of all things. Yes, I understand that this is indeed the internet, and that such content is not scarce throughout, but it still stands as logical and right that this specific corner remain innocent and unbiased on the subject either way.

We're not teaching anyone about this. There's just going to be some support thread, and debating will only be allowed in a forum that requires approval before posting.

All we're saying is that bashing homosexuals is just as bad as people who are racists, sexists, etc. No one would except the latter, so why should the former be accepted?

You are indeed teaching; the very statement that "homosexuality is acceptable" teaches young visitors to this site that very thing; thus I propose there be no stated position in that regard for the sake of those who disagree.

Like you, I'm wholeheartedly against bashing homosexuals (as should have already been apparent in my stated agreement with Nuvakat), but that by no means necessitates the tolerance of the open act of homosexuality (i.e., even mentioning the subject in passing: for example, an editor for the news reciting an anecdote in which he briefly notes his attraction to another man).

 

[Enzap]

Let me see if I have this correct:

Pretty much nothing is actually going to change about the forums other than an increase in protection of people's rights. There's not going to be a massive movement to inform people about homosexuality nor will people be posting pictures of themselves with their partners in every thread. The forums will remain a Pokemon based forum with the same people that have been here all along. The only change will be a more inviting atmosphere for everyone.

This is all true, correct?

 

[Satoshi-chan]

Like you, I'm wholeheartedly against bashing homosexuals (as should have already been apparent in my stated agreement with Nuvakat), but that by no means necessitates the tolerance of the open act of homosexuality (i.e., even mentioning the subject in passing: for example, an editor for the news reciting an anecdote in which he briefly notes his attraction to another man).

So, are you saying that we should never even mention homosexuality on this forum? Even in the shipping threads, where heterosexual and homosexual shippings are discussed? Should we also just ignore a gay teen who makes a blog post saying that he's depressed, and possibly allow him or her to commit suicide instead?

Besides, what exactly is "the open act of homosexuality?" I'm kinda confused here. I didn't know that having feelings for someone of the same sex as you as opposed to the opposite sex was an "act."

Let me see if I have this correct:

Pretty much nothing is actually going to change about the forums other than an increase in protection of people's rights. There's not going to be a massive movement to inform people about homosexuality nor will people be posting pictures of themselves with their partners in every thread. The forums will remain a Pokemon based forum with the same people that have been here all along. The only change will be a more inviting atmosphere for everyone.

This is all true, correct?

Pretty much, yeah. We're still Bulbagarden, a Pokemon forum community that discusses everything under the sun, from Pokemon to sports, from Ash Ketchum to Bulma Briefs. We just are not going to allow people to say "I don't like them queers because I was raised to hate them queers," because some of us actually fall under the category, and religion, upbringing, or just finding gay people to be icky is not an excuse to make an entire group feel like they are garbage and unwanted.

 

[Rukario-kun]

Let me see if I have this correct:

Pretty much nothing is actually going to change about the forums other than an increase in protection of people's rights. There's not going to be a massive movement to inform people about homosexuality nor will people be posting pictures of themselves with their partners in every thread. The forums will remain a Pokemon based forum with the same people that have been here all along. The only change will be a more inviting atmosphere for everyone.

This is all true, correct?

I must disagree to a certain degree: If the passing of this new policy were to be unannounced, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now and what you've said (that there would be a more inviting atmosphere for everyone) would be correct. However, some genius thought it'd be a good idea to broadcast the policy change on Bulbanews, so here we are.

So, are you saying that we should never even mention homosexuality on this forum? Even in the shipping threads, where heterosexual and homosexual shippings are discussed? Should we also just ignore a gay teen who makes a blog post saying that he's depressed, and possibly allow him or her to commit suicide instead?

Besides, what exactly is "the open act of homosexuality?" I'm kinda confused here. I didn't know that having feelings for someone of the same sex as you as opposed to the opposite sex was an "act."

Apart from the shipping section, where discussions are inevitable due to the romantic nature of the threads (and, I assume, threads are relatively separated and organized according to their natures), yes, homosexuality should remain unmentioned and wholly ignored. As for this blog of which you speak, I am one quite unacquainted with the medium and its relation to Bulbagarden Forums/ Bulbapedia, therefore please don't consider it as contextual to my statements.

As for your question: By "open act of homosexuality" I mean the obvious displayed actions associated strictly with the lifestyle (again, such as a male stating in a news article of his that he's attracted to another male). If I may be so technical, I'd like to remind you that "to have" and "to state" are verbs, and therefore, actions ("acts").

 

[Ivysaur]

I'm very happy this is a pro-LGBTQ stance and not a neutrality one. Great move Bulbagarden, one the rest of the world should follow.

 

[Eevee]

Much of what I would have said has already been said by Nuvakat as far as the crucial differentiation between the act of homosexuality and the performers thereof and how each ought be treated as polar opposites
...
I will also throw my support behind user dademon in his concern for the countenance of his children. Sexuality and its deviants are things which ought only be taught about to children by their parents

Dude, half of the big words you're trying to use don't make sense. "Countenance" means facial appearance.

"Love the sinner, hate the sin" has, tragically, become an excuse to continue griping about people with feelings unlike yours (how dare they not be just like me!) in exchange for the occasional token admittance that hey maybe they don't deserve to all be tortured for eternity, maybe. That's certainly not the original intent of the phrase, and using it this way is intellectual dishonesty of a shameful degree. Would you love someone who stole from you? Beat you up? Killed your parents? Loving someone despite those kinds of sins—you know, things that actually matter—is truly loving the sinner and overcoming all those caveman urges for spite and revenge.

But claiming to "love the sinner" when the "sin" is that two girls are holding hands in the mall? How brave. That's a pretty cheap way to cling to moral high ground without losing one's soapbox in the face of increasing social apathy towards this particular brand of invented outrage.

Like you, I'm wholeheartedly against bashing homosexuals (as should have already been apparent in my stated agreement with Nuvakat), but that by no means necessitates the tolerance of the open act of homosexuality (i.e., even mentioning the subject in passing: for example, an editor for the news reciting an anecdote in which he briefly notes his attraction to another man).

And this is precisely what I'm talking about. You try to win favor by claiming to "agree", then use that token goodwill to introduce something incredibly offensive.

You are proposing that anyone who does not share your taste in romantic partners be barred from even mentioning anything about his/her personal life. That's not "not taking a stance"; that's outright silencing a segment of the population, based on, what, the total number of Y chromosomes shared by them and their significant others?

There is nothing child-unfriendly about sexual orientation. Kids pick up pretty fast that there's at least one; the only risk here is that they might discover there are others. Luckily, human beings are a resilient bunch, and I'm sure the species will manage to survive even with the knowledge that, somewhere, two girls might be kissing. The horror!

 

[The Outrage]

I must disagree to a certain degree: If the passing of this new policy were to be unannounced, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now and what you've said (that there would be a more inviting atmosphere for everyone) would be correct. However, some genius thought it'd be a good idea to broadcast the policy change on Bulbanews, so here we are.

Some genius decided to be open about how the forums are being governed (you know, that transparency thing we all seem to want) by basically saying "here's some clarification to the extent of our current anti-user bashing rules"?

Honestly, if there were more geniuses out there, we wouldn't need this stated outright.

 

[Musashi]

You are indeed teaching; the very statement that "homosexuality is acceptable" teaches young visitors to this site that very thing;

It is acceptable. Anyone thinking otherwise is wrong.

That's like saying we're teaching kids that blacks are equal to whites because we don't allow black people to be attacked. It's an archaic mindset that has no place here.

 

[Eevee]

As for your question: By "open act of homosexuality" I mean the obvious displayed actions associated strictly with the lifestyle (again, such as a male stating in a news article of his that he's attracted to another male). If I may be so technical, I'd like to remind you that "to have" and "to state" are verbs, and therefore, actions ("acts").

Do you frequently refer to social interactions as "lifestyle"? Do you display actions associated strictly with a typical heterosexual lifestyle, id est, the mentioning of oneself as having an innate interest of a personal persuasion to a female of the species?

Dehumanizing people just so you can talk about them like undesirables is far more cruel and inhumane than any combination of sexual partners. You have lost your way.