MS reconsiders banning homosexual LIVE members policy

[Zeus]

According to reports, Microsoft is considering changing its policy on homosexual users who describe their sexual activity on the LIVE service. The reconsideration comes after a female was banned from the service after describing herself as a lesbian.


Microsoft is considering changing its policy on how Xbox users describe their sexuality following a row over a user who claimed to have been barred from Xbox LIVE for describing herself as a lesbian.

Interviewed by MTV, Xbox LIVE program manager for policy and enforcement, Stephen Toulouse, said: "I can't talk about future plans, except to say we want to provide the capability for our users to express relationship preference or gender without a way for it to be misused."

His comments follow an article by The Consumerist in which an Xbox LIVE user named Teresa who says she was abused on Microsoft's gaming service because she identified herself in her profile as a lesbian.


News Source: <a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/shane_richmond/blog/2009/02/27/will_xbox_live_change_dont_ask_dont_tell_policy_on _homosexuality" target="_blank">Telegraph</a>

[Sal]

but why cute asian lesbians!

[Happsai]

http://fandomania.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/best_dressed_animation_fema.jpg
Approves, but still wants to ban all the Mexicans.

[sk8er_4_life_ez]

i say ban them gay bastards lol

[crypysmoker]

WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..
I wana broadcast Im a lesbian so people will think im cool and they wont let me. WAAAAAH.

Its pathetic. The only people who would want to do that on a public gaming network want any kind of attention they can get. Real gay/ lesbians know that people will bother and harrass them because people are closed minded and kids belive whatever they are told to believe.

I still bet its some 19 year old girl who thinks its cool to be a lesbian and wants to get a rise out of someone.

If you read on other sites, even GLADD thinks the girl is ridiculous for whining about it.

Oh and th eguy above me.. going by your SIG.. I think im gonna rob your house ;} see you soon lol

[ThreeDog]

The policy is fine as it is, if ms do allow a sexual orientation on gamertags what will happen, the same thing that happens now.
Mr/Mrs gay has just won a 32 player CoD6 Match, the kiddies don't like that very much so we'll all file a complaint! so he/she gets banned! which is exactly what is happening right now! except the comment re sexual orientation is in the motto or bio.

This issue is overblown (bad pun) the policy is fine. MS needs to stick to its guns to prevent mayhem. Once again id like to state my support of lesbians on video.
Our current policy for Gamertags and Profiles does not allow expression of sexual orientation under the Terms of Use. That applies to *any* orientation, straight or gay or otherwise. Gamers can however self identify their orientation in voice chat, where context for their statements can be provided.

[DugFreez]

I have no problem with the gay and lesbian folk, but there really isn't any reason to announce who / what you bang on an on-line video game service. You don't have to hide who you are, but you also don't need to put it out there anymore than a straight person would. LIVE isn't match.com...people are there to play, not to hook up.....except for UNO. ;-)

I'm sure, as other posters said,the majority of gay people don't feel the need to broadcast who they do their personal business with on LIVE. I'm not upset by this "ban" (I don't think she was banned...I think she just had to change her profile) and I think Microsoft was right to take it down.

[Sepioth]

I have no problem with the gay and lesbian folk, but there really isn't any reason to announce who / what you bang on an on-line video game service. You don't have to hide who you are, but you also don't need to put it out there anymore than a straight person would. LIVE isn't match.com...people are there to play, not to hook up.....except for UNO. ;-)

I'm sure, as other posters said,the majority of gay people don't feel the need to broadcast who they do their personal business with on LIVE. I'm not upset by this "ban" (I don't think she was banned...I think she just had to change her profile) and I think Microsoft was right to take it down.

I agree ... I have absolutely NOTHING wrong with gay/lesbian people .. I think Ellen is funny. I have friends who are gay ...

But I'm completely SICK and tired of them wanting special rights and advertising that they are gay ... I don't have a straight parade, I don't have a pretty colored symbol stating I'm straight, I don't advertise I'm straight ... get over yourselves and move on with life ... you want acceptance by others then stop putting it in there faces and constantly making it relevant ... cause it's not.

[Happsai]

After reading some of the replies here, I can't help but wonder... :confused:

...would there be anything wrong with an African American gamer openly identifying himself as black on a social network of a particular interest to perhaps connect with others of similar background to befriend and socialize while being free of harassment and prejudice...? ...is that reasonable...?

...or are we just completely sick and tired of it because there is no MLK Day equivalent for the whites? And they're probably only black because it's cool, right?

[ThreeDog]

After reading some of the replies here, I can't help but wonder... :confused:

...would there be anything wrong with an African American gamer openly identifying himself as black on a social network of a particular interest to perhaps connect with others of similar background to befriend and socialize while being free of harassment and prejudice...? ...is that reasonable...?

...or are we just completely sick and tired of it because there is no MLK Day equivalent for the whites? And they're probably only black because it's cool, right?

Depends on the network you raise a good point though, i don't think it would need to be on a gamertag/bio/motto either. it doesn't matter there's nothing wrong with it but does anybody need to see it? judging by the community as a whole i don't think everyone mature enough to handle it.

There's a lot of stigma surround race too sometimes less about the color of skin, asians coming back to live in the states after wwII and vietnam, iraqi's and afghani's currently in war, americans and british in the middle east for waging these wars theres a lot more examples, just look at the reputation we brits now have worldwide for drinking too much and ruining popular holiday resorts :D

Why not just join in a community where it doesn't matter if you're gay/straight/black/white/orange/green/come from the planet kellgar/ if it comes to revealing race why not leave it until you're voice chatting and mutually getting to know someone?

Just my 5p

[Happsai]

Depends on the network you raise a good point though, i don't think it would need to be on a gamertag/bio/motto either. it doesn't matter there's nothing wrong with it but does anybody need to see it? judging by the community as a whole i don't think everyone mature enough to handle it.
You're right, nobody needs to see it in a person's profile. The beauty of it is that people choose whether to view someone's profile as well as what it means to them. A profile is an outline or description of a person. In this case, the end-user is given the choice of what to include in this profile as others have the choice to consume and react to the inputted information.
Why not just join in a community where it doesn't matter if you're gay/straight/black/white/orange/green/come from the planet kellgar/ if it comes to revealing race why not leave it until you're voice chatting and mutually getting to know someone?
The problem is that apparently it does matter to Microsoft whether someone falls into one of these minority categories. You're right, Live lacks a lot of maturity to handle certain minority groups, but I would never use the immaturity of ignorance as an excuse for those who would promote hate anymore than I would use the immaturity of racism to excuse the KKK. I think we can agree that just because children and bigots can be cruel and abusive doesn't mean we should just accept it.
While it may be easier to simply omit a significant part of one's identity from his/her profile until private chatting, that would imply that one should censor and withhold a significant factor they may identify themselves with.

Please understand that I'm not saying that including sexual orientation in a profile is recommendable or even practical, but it is a matter of choice and expression to identify oneself through their personal profile in a matter they choose to be fitting for themselves. To even partially silence one minority group in particular over others on even the most remote of subjects is the very essence of oppression.

[sirxlaughs]

After reading some of the replies here, I can't help but wonder... :confused:

...would there be anything wrong with an African American gamer openly identifying himself as black on a social network of a particular interest to perhaps connect with others of similar background to befriend and socialize while being free of harassment and prejudice...? ...is that reasonable...?

...or are we just completely sick and tired of it because there is no MLK Day equivalent for the whites? And they're probably only black because it's cool, right?

It was a ToS violation. With all the controversy about sex, predators, abuse, etc they want nothing to do with sex on Live. It's obvious enough why. They said that if you want, you can tell people through chat, IM, or whatever, but you can't put it in your gamertag/profile. The issue isn't that the girl was a lesbian. She is making it out to be b/c she wants to be special and be allowed to put it in her profile. It's like the guy a while back who had Gay as part of his name. His real last name had "gay" in it, and Microsoft told him to change it. Live is not a forum like Facebook. It's an online gaming community. I'm sure Microsoft wants people to use it that way, not go browsing through people's profiles for anything "interesting."

[sirxlaughs]

You're right, nobody needs to see it in a person's profile. The beauty of it is that people choose whether to view someone's profile as well as what it means to them. A profile is an outline or description of a person. In this case, the end-user is given the choice of what to include in this profile as others have the choice to consume and react to the inputted information.

In this case, it's a violation of Live's ToS to include anything in your profile regarding sex.

"As stated in the Xbox Live Terms of Use, a member may not create a gamertag or use text in other profile fields that include comments that look, sound like, stand for, hint at, abbreviate, or insinuate content of a potentially sexual nature. Profiles that do are asked to change the language and suspended until changes are made. In regards to sexual orientation, for gamertags or profiles we do not allow expression of any type of orientation, be that hetero or other. Players can, however, self identify in voice communication where context is more easily explained to all players involved.

"Harassment of any kind is not condoned and is taken very seriously; we strongly encourage Xbox Live members to immediately report inappropriate behavior through the compliant tools in the service so that it can be investigated and the appropriate action taken."

"The Xbox Live community grows daily, and we continue to explore methods and levels of enforcement to enhance the ways our members connect and have fun, while adhering to a code of conduct that encourages respect and keeps the service safe and fun for all our members."

The problem is that apparently it does matter to Microsoft whether someone falls into one of these minority categories. You're right, Live lacks a lot of maturity to handle certain minority groups, but I would never use the immaturity of ignorance as an excuse for those who would promote hate anymore than I would use the immaturity of racism to excuse the KKK. I think we can agree that just because children and bigots can be cruel and abusive doesn't mean we should just accept it.
While it may be easier to simply omit a significant part of one's identity from his/her profile until private chatting, that would imply that one should censor and withhold a significant factor they may identify themselves with.

Please understand that I'm not saying that including sexual orientation in a profile is recommendable or even practical, but it is a matter of choice and expression to identify oneself through their personal profile in a matter they choose to be fitting for themselves. To even partially silence one minority group in particular over others on even the most remote of subjects is the very essence of oppression.

It matters to Microsoft when they get put in the media along with talk of sexual predators targeting minors. It matters to Microsoft when they're getting negative attention about their kids being exposed to "inappropriate material."
Another thing is, how is being a lesbian a significant part of her online gaming identity? Do lesbians play differently? Should we all be alerted just in case? No, of course not. It doesn't make an inkling of difference as far as gaming is concerned. So, it doesn't need to be there. If she develops a dialog or some kind of relationship with another member of Live, then she can feel free to divulge all the details of her "identity" that she wants.
I'm going to go ahead and guess that Microsoft has done plenty of research and has had experts draw up the ToS. No sex is no sex. Microsoft's servce, Microsoft's rules. She things they're being discriminant. They know she broke the rules.

edit: I was thinking about it a bit while discussing it with the missus, and I just realized that this girl probably had "I'm a lesbian." as her motto. That would make more sense if you just look at her avatar and see a bubble that says, "I'm a lesbian." Either way, I'm with Microsoft on this one. It's a gaming community. If you want to talk about anything related to sex, do it privately and at your own risk. Once you put it in your profile, it's public and Microsoft is involved. I'm sure they want no part in things like that.

[Happsai]

Another thing is, how is being a lesbian a significant part of her online gaming identity? Do lesbians play differently? Should we all be alerted just in case? No, of course not. It doesn't make an inkling of difference as far as gaming is concerned. So, it doesn't need to be there. If she develops a dialog or some kind of relationship with another member of Live, then she can feel free to divulge all the details of her "identity" that she wants.
I'm going to go ahead and guess that Microsoft has done plenty of research and has had experts draw up the ToS. No sex is no sex. Microsoft's servce, Microsoft's rules. She things they're being discriminant. They know she broke the rules.
I understand that Microsoft specifically put a clause in place for this situation and it was indeed violated. I never thought that this was a knee-jerk reaction on their part--they quite simply did their job. The question at hand is the legitimacy of said clause. While she did sign up for the service and therefore agreed to the conditions, we cannot simply excuse the terms from this alone. If discriminatory rules were left alone, the PGA would still not allow black golfers to play on their tours. Progression only happens when people stop and say "wait a minute! Rules are rules, but this isn't right."

Again, I cannot defend the practicality of claiming one's sexual preference on a social network intended for gamers (which incidentally include people of different sexual orientations), but we must be careful not to equate sexual orientation with sex, and like you said, this is what Microsoft fears. Many have trouble with the difference and therefore claim that somehow the existence of a lesbian is considered "inappropriate" or somehow threatening to their children's well being. It is almost as if that a person who identifies herself as "lesbian" is automatically implying sexual promiscuity, which is not at all the case. Should someone's motto saying "I'm married" be considered inappropriate because of the sexual implications that I can derive from that? I would say not because being married does not equate to sex or even imply that one is even sexually active. Neither does identifying oneself as lesbian. Marriage, however, does play into one's identity and significant description of oneself, even if it is not a practical characteristic to include in one's gamertag.

[ThreeDog]

The problem is that apparently it does matter to Microsoft whether someone falls into one of these minority categories.

You make a lot of good points but like the others say its Microsofts service Microsofts TOS and everyone accepts it on signing up for the network.
Ofc by bringing up this issue the gay community may have just changed microsofts mind they're considering this in full, in an ideal world none of this would matter everyone could have what they wanted on their profile and it would never be a problem. I've yet to see race become an issue with MS but if this was the 60s with martin luther king i would wonder if "i am an african american" or "i am black" would of gone down with MS.

It is a shame these issues were not resolved on the first xbox the lack of freedom in your profile combined with a mature network made up of mostly adults (you had one way to pay: credit cards) if the live network had not of gone mainstream the subject of this thread wouldn't even be an issue right now hell it shouldn't be an issue at all anywhere anytime, it should be the people with a lack of sense or common decency that loose their accounts or get warnings but despite the TOS it doesn't work like that i've yet to hear of a story "guy banned for abusing gay guy", so the only option is to pre-empt this stupidity with a restrictive TOS that controls profiles so people stating their sexuality can be banned.

Like sixlaughs says this is only really an issue for ms when the media pick it up but thats how change happens. Microsoft is right in this case, people just need to understand that this isn't discrimination, You cannot place "im straight and have a boner" in your profile either and i would never want to see a child exposed to such a comment :p

[gerbilboy]

Who cares, unless they post "special pictures" of them doing gay "activities" then , why?

[Happsai]

i've yet to hear of a story "guy banned for abusing gay guy", so the only option is to pre-empt this stupidity with a restrictive TOS that controls profiles so people stating their sexuality can be banned.
I absolutely understand Microsoft's reasoning here. Personally, I would much rather keep the gay guys and ban the abusers though. MS's (former) position is the easy solution, but it ignores the bigger issues that they will now seemingly have to face.

Like sixlaughs says this is only really an issue for ms when the media pick it up but thats how change happens. Microsoft is right in this case, people just need to understand that this isn't discrimination, You cannot place "im straight and have a boner" in your profile either and i would never want to see a child exposed to such a comment :p
"I'm straight" is not sexual and in itself not offensive.
"have a boner" is sexual and very inappropriate.
It is indeed discrimination when a person's legitimate public identity is placed under restriction to appease those who are intolerant of particular groups. A logical discrimination that inhibits all is discrimination nonetheless and is but the easy way out of social responsibility.

I'm very pleased to see Microsoft take a reproach though. Not so much for people posting out-of-place information in their Live profiles, but for the stance they will need to take against the hatred and bigotry that has plagued Xbox Live for far too long.

[sirxlaughs]

I understand that Microsoft specifically put a clause in place for this situation and it was indeed violated. I never thought that this was a knee-jerk reaction on their part--they quite simply did their job. The question at hand is the legitimacy of said clause. While she did sign up for the service and therefore agreed to the conditions, we cannot simply excuse the terms from this alone. If discriminatory rules were left alone, the PGA would still not allow black golfers to play on their tours. Progression only happens when people stop and say "wait a minute! Rules are rules, but this isn't right."

Again, I cannot defend the practicality of claiming one's sexual preference on a social network intended for gamers (which incidentally include people of different sexual orientations), but we must be careful not to equate sexual orientation with sex, and like you said, this is what Microsoft fears. Many have trouble with the difference and therefore claim that somehow the existence of a lesbian is considered "inappropriate" or somehow threatening to their children's well being. It is almost as if that a person who identifies herself as "lesbian" is automatically implying sexual promiscuity, which is not at all the case. Should someone's motto saying "I'm married" be considered inappropriate because of the sexual implications that I can derive from that? I would say not because being married does not equate to sex or even imply that one is even sexually active. Neither does identifying oneself as lesbian. Marriage, however, does play into one's identity and significant description of oneself, even if it is not a practical characteristic to include in one's gamertag.

You make valid point, but I don't think it's the message Microsoft was sending. You say that lesbian can be considered inappropriate or imply promiscuity, but Microsoft's Terms don't mention anything that has specifically to do with being gay. They even added in their statement that information about sexual orientation is not allowed - hetero or otherwise. Marital status information, I don't think is mentioned anywhere in the terms. I'm pretty that if I made a tag like, "sIngL4u", Microsoft would have a problem with it, though. This is the part of the terms MS was probably referring to:

Create a Gamertag , avatar or use text in other profile fields that may offend other members. This includes comments that look, sound like, stand for, hint at, abbreviate, or insinuate or relate to any of the following: profane words/phrases, topics or content of a sexual nature, hate speech (including but not limited to racial, ethnic, or religious slurs), illegal drugs/controlled substances, or illegal activities;

There's nothing there to single out anything. They just don't anything there. At all. No matter what. If it's reported, or they find out about it, they can "take disciplinary action." I don't know for sure, but I don't think you can mention race (your own, or otherwise) in your gamertag/profile either.
What I don't like is how this girl, who (to me) was just looking for attention, is making out to be some kind of anti-gay. That just starts up all kinds of crap (and more attention that she's probably looking for). After reading the articles, it started to look like someone going:
"Hey, I'm gay."
account suspension
"Hey, they suspended my account b/c I'm gay."
Microsoft answers back.
"Did I mention that I'm gay? Anyone? Is this thing on?"

Alright, we get it. She's a lesbian and she plays video games. If she wants to go on a forum to meet other gamers, than Live is a good place. If she wanted to meet other lesbians, then she needs to go find a forum for that.

edit: added a few things
I absolutely understand Microsoft's reasoning here. Personally, I would much rather keep the gay guys and ban the abusers though. MS's (former) position is the easy solution, but it ignores the bigger issues that they will now seemingly have to face.

I would rather get rid of the abusers as well, but Microsoft can not monitor conversations/messages. They are private. I think it goes into invasion of privacy unless there is a cause to do so. That's why we all get those, "Experience may change during online play." or "Online play not rated." messages. You put on that mic, or open that message window, it's similar to picking up the phone or using a messaging service - at your own risk. Microsoft suggests using the mute/ignore options, player review options to add people to your avoided/preferred list, or the parental controls. The more complaints one person gets, the more Microsoft can get involved.

"I'm straight" is not sexual and in itself not offensive.
"have a boner" is sexual and very inappropriate.
It is indeed discrimination when a person's legitimate public identity is placed under restriction to appease those who are intolerant of particular groups. A logical discrimination that inhibits all is discrimination nonetheless and is but the easy way out of social responsibility.

"I'm straight" is just as sexual (and not allowed under the ToS) as "I'm gay." Unless, maybe, you're standing straight, sitting straight, using a straight edge, straightening up your room, etc.. haha
Since discrimination is treating someone differently or singling someone out for being part of a specific group, class, etc - if you apply the rule to everyone, you are not discriminating anyone. If some people were allowed to talk about their sexual orientation, but others not, or if they favored certain people b/c of it, then it would be discrimination. I agree that we shouldn't restrict people's public identities when parts of those identities are relevant. Online gaming and sexual preference don't seem to be relevant. Microsoft has deemed it so for years now. This isn't a new rule, and I doubt they will change it.

[Happsai]

You make valid point, but I don't think it's the message Microsoft was sending. You say that lesbian can be considered inappropriate or imply promiscuity, but Microsoft's Terms don't mention anything that has specifically to do with being gay. They even added in their statement that information about sexual orientation is not allowed - hetero or otherwise. Marital status information, I don't think is mentioned anywhere in the terms. I'm pretty that if I made a tag like, "sIngL4u", Microsoft would have a problem with it, though.
To be embarrassingly honest, I had to stare at the tag example you gave for several minutes before I got it. Thank God it's Friday, right? :o
Yes, the existing rules clearly state that sexual orientation is something to be kept out of people's personal profiles on Live. This is the rule that is under reexamination because someone asked "why?".
The thing about the example gamertag you gave is that even though it is not directly sexual, it is arguably sexually inviting and suggestive (or at least flirty). Saying "I'm gay" does not invite or suggest sexual promiscuity/activity at all. It is a simple statement of one's being that they hold as part of their identity.

After reading the articles, it started to look like someone going:
"Hey, I'm gay."
account suspension
"Hey, they suspended my account b/c I'm gay."
Microsoft answers back.
"Did I mention that I'm gay? Anyone? Is this thing on?"

Alright, we get it. She's a lesbian and she plays video games. If she wants to go on a forum to meet other gamers, than Live is a good place. If she wanted to meet other lesbians, then she needs to go find a forum for that.
Maybe she is attention whoring. I have no way of knowing. But you have to admit, her situation and bringing it to light was legitimate enough for MS to reassess the situation from her point of view. I imagine the most likely reason to want to say you're gay on a gaming network is to find other gay gamers. As it stands right now, Microsoft's limitations say that she should, (as you suggested with a forum), find somewhere else to do that. Now someone has said as I did before "Wait a minute! Rules are rules, but this isn't right.". Nobody got hurt or damaged in her outing herself except for her--and we both know it wasn't from what she said; it was from who she is.

I would rather get rid of the abusers as well, but Microsoft can not monitor conversations/messages. They are private. I think it goes into invasion of privacy unless there is a cause to do so. That's why we all get those, "Experience may change during online play." or "Online play not rated." messages. You put on that mic, or open that message window, it's similar to picking up the phone or using a messaging service - at your own risk. Microsoft suggests using the mute/ignore options, player review options to add people to your avoided/preferred list, or the parental controls. The more complaints one person gets, the more Microsoft can get involved.
True, Microsoft certainly cannot control the words that come out of a stranger's mouth. The point to take here though is that we have an instance where a legitimate gamer was banned rather than the real offenders. I honestly don't see the lesbian as the bad guy in the exchange.

"I'm straight" is just as sexual (and not allowed under the ToS) as "I'm gay." Unless, maybe, you're standing straight, sitting straight, using a straight edge, straightening up your room, etc.. haha
Since discrimination is treating someone differently or singling someone out for being part of a specific group, class, etc - if you apply the rule to everyone, you are not discriminating anyone. If some people were allowed to talk about their sexual orientation, but others not, or if they favored certain people b/c of it, then it would be discrimination. I agree that we shouldn't restrict people's public identities when parts of those identities are relevant. Online gaming and sexual preference don't seem to be relevant. Microsoft has deemed it so for years now. This isn't a new rule, and I doubt they will change it.
"I'm straight" and "I'm gay" are only sexual as far as you derive the sexual implications from them. It is for that reason I argue that "I'm straight" is just as sexual as "I'm married"--in both cases, it tells me nothing about one's sex life; just about one's state of being.
The reason I call an inhibition to all discriminatory is because its purpose is directed to a particular group. In this instance, no one is allowed to mention sexual orientation just so gays won't say they're gay. It's a common ploy used in politics to control a group by applying standards to all that especially impact a particular group. I agree that relevancy of sexual orientation on a gaming is questionable at best. I can't defend that. But it is wrong to ban certain legitimate identity factors that are very significant to some while any other legitimate identity factor (relevant to gaming or not) would likely be acceptable. The infamous GameJew comes to mind as an example.

[sirxlaughs]

To be embarrassingly honest, I had to stare at the tag example you gave for several minutes before I got it. Thank God it's Friday, right? :o

Indeed. I just noticed I forgot to add "sure" in my sentence too. It's one of those days, I suppose.

Yes, the existing rules clearly state that sexual orientation is something to be kept out of people's personal profiles on Live.

It's actually not so much that sexual orientation is to be kept out. It's anything that can in any way (even slightly) be misconstrued in a sexual manner. That's why I don't think it's allowed to describe marital status either.

This is the rule that is under reexamination because someone asked "why?".

I actually didn't even realize this (again, on those days). I've gotten so used to ignoring Zeus' titles, that I didn't realize it says that Microsoft is reconsidering the rule. In actuality, they are not. The guy that wrote the article, "Will Xbox LIVE change 'don't ask, don’t tell' policy on homosexuality?" only speculates if they will. The only part of his article that he uses to infer anything is from an MTV interview where he quotes Microsoft as stating, "I can't talk about future plans, except to say we want to provide the capability for our users to express relationship preference or gender without a way for it to be misused."
So, it doesn't seem that this rule is under any more reexamination than any other day.

The thing about the example gamertag you gave is that even though it is not directly sexual, it is arguably sexually inviting and suggestive (or at least flirty). Saying "I'm gay" does not invite or suggest sexual promiscuity/activity at all. It is a simple statement of one's being that they hold as part of their identity.

While my example was definitely more forward than a simple statement, it's the fact that even a statement can be viewed in all manners of ways by different people. You may see it as a simple statement, but someone else might say ask why someone feels the need to point it out. Are they looking for something? Are they hoping someone will come out and go, "Hey! Me too! Wow, small world!" That's why Microsoft says that anything that can even remotely suggest something else can not be allowed. Things like sexual, religious, ethnic, political, etc orientations, views, positions, etc are just unnecessary in online gaming. If you become close with a fellow gamer, then there is nothing stopping you from divulging more information. As long as I'm blasting people on Gears of War, I don't need people to know whether or not I'm married, have kids, believe in communism, enjoy pole dancing on the weekends, and make a mean scrambled eggs (wtf?). I don't need anyone else to tell me anything about themselves either. I just know I need to shoot someone on the opposing team. Hot button issues are things that almost always lead to problems. Since we all go to an online gaming forum to game online, I hope they keep it as dedicated to that as possible. If Live were Second Life (kind of how Home is trying to be), then they might have issues telling people that they can't mention things about themselves. Now that I think about it, I wonder how Sony will handle these issues, should they arise.

Maybe she is attention whoring. I have no way of knowing. But you have to admit, her situation and bringing it to light was legitimate enough for MS to reassess the situation from her point of view.

I didn't actually realize that anyone thought Microsoft was reassessing the situation. I honestly don't think they are.

True, Microsoft certainly cannot control the words that come out of a stranger's mouth. The point to take here though is that we have an instance where a legitimate gamer was banned rather than the real offenders. I honestly don't see the lesbian as the bad guy in the exchange.

She may be a legitimate gamer, but she broke the rules. Just like she was probably reported (and also brought the attention to herself when she complained), she could have chosen to ignore/mute the people offending her. I'm from the school of thought that people don't have the right to not be offended. If saying, "I'm gay." is offensive to someone, then tough doodie. If someone chooses to offend someone because they're gay, then tough doodie as well. That's life, and everyone has an opinion. When you're in a competitive forum, people tend to get aggressive. You have to develop some tough skin, or just ignore it altogether. I've been called plenty and have heard enough insults from people that don't even know my first name. In one ear, out the other. Once the console gets shut off, I go back to reality where those people don't matter to me.

"I'm straight" and "I'm gay" are only sexual as far as you derive the sexual implications from them. It is for that reason I argue that "I'm straight" is just as sexual as "I'm married"--in both cases, it tells me nothing about one's sex life; just about one's state of being.

Exactly. The statements themselves are not sexual, but depending on the person who's reading them, they could derive something from them. That's why the rules state that anything remotely sexual can not be allowed. I think it's a good rule that protects the gaming community as a whole. Doesn't stop anyone from calling me a fag once in a while. Do I care? Can't say that I do. haha

The reason I call an inhibition to all discriminatory is because its purpose is directed to a particular group. In this instance, no one is allowed to mention sexual orientation just so gays won't say they're gay. It's a common ploy used in politics to control a group by applying standards to all that especially impact a particular group. I agree that relevancy of sexual orientation on a gaming is questionable at best. I can't defend that. But it is wrong to ban certain legitimate identity factors that are very significant to some while any other legitimate identity factor (relevant to gaming or not) would likely be acceptable. The infamous GameJew comes to mind as an example.

You seem to be assuming that the rule was created to keep gay people from coming out and saying their gay. I can't picture Microsoft execs sitting at a table saying, "Alright. The agenda today is how to keep those gays as far in the closet as possible when it comes to our gaming service. We can't have them stirring up trouble."
Well, if it were a different era, I could. You say it is wrong to ban legitimate factors, but are things like sexual orientiation, race, political views, etc legitimate in an online gaming forum? Microsoft had already decided that they are not.
I never knew what (or who, as the case is) GameJew was until you mentioned it. I can only think, though, that the only reason someone would make a name like that is b/c they know it will get attention. That might not have been his only reason, but it was definitely one of them. GameJew gets more attention than "GameGuyWithSillyHat" or "GameDudeWithCuteCurls" (yes, I'm being silly). From the few episodes I saw, I don't see anything "infamous" about him. He just seems like another one of those online personalities looking for attention. Like AskaNinja, Angry Video Game Nerd, etc. I am, however, 100% positive that Microsoft wouldn't allow GameJew as a gamertag. haha

[Happsai]

It's actually not so much that sexual orientation is to be kept out. It's anything that can in any way (even slightly) be misconstrued in a sexual manner. That's why I don't think it's allowed to describe marital status either.
I really really don't think Marital status would be considered a taboo on Xbox Live. Seriously, Sesame Street covers that topic regularly even though Bob remained conspicously single over the years despite Linda's obvious advancements--sorry...lost my train of thought.

While Microsoft isn't (and probably would never) say they're going to reassess a policy having to do with acceptable/unacceptable speech, the exposure may bring them pause to consider why saying "lesbian" is grounds for banishment, but the gamertag "gaykiller" isn't (yes, it really exists on live).

While my example was definitely more forward than a simple statement, it's the fact that even a statement can be viewed in all manners of ways by different people. You may see it as a simple statement, but someone else might say ask why someone feels the need to point it out. Are they looking for something? Are they hoping someone will come out and go, "Hey! Me too! Wow, small world!"
I would argue that the view that matters most is the person who identifies themselves. You could extrapolate just as many false messages from saying "I'm a girl" compared to "I'm gay". In fairness, we would need to see this girl's profile to have a better idea. If she was inviting or suggestive in her demeanor, then I would fully agree with your point. If she simply stated "I'm gay" then the meanings people get from that would be speculation and not direct sexual conduct.
I'm from the school of thought that people don't have the right to not be offended. If saying, "I'm gay." is offensive to someone, then tough doodie. If someone chooses to offend someone because they're gay, then tough doodie as well.
I fully respect that school of thought. Probably because you have to have enrolled in it to play on Live at all.
But given all of the crap that you and I have both been exposed to on live--all the vile garbage that 12 years old spew while playing games they're not old enough to play, don't you think the reasoning for this girl's banishment is pretty darn trivial?
Doesn't stop anyone from calling me a fag once in a while. Do I care? Can't say that I do. haha
Nor do I. I've also been called the N word multiple times. It doesn't bother me either (I'm not black), but I know these words would be hurtful to some. The rules Microsoft puts in place don't help them. In my opinion, it silences the wrong people.

You seem to be assuming that the rule was created to keep gay people from coming out and saying their gay. I can't picture Microsoft execs sitting at a table saying, "Alright. The agenda today is how to keep those gays as far in the closet as possible when it comes to our gaming service. We can't have them stirring up trouble."
Well, if it were a different era, I could. You say it is wrong to ban legitimate factors, but are things like sexual orientiation, race, political views, etc legitimate in an online gaming forum? Microsoft had already decided that they are not.
It's like I said, Microsoft is taking the easy way out. It's not that they want to keep gays in the closet of course, but if they can keep the topic of homosexuality off live, they'll keep the topic of homophobes off live. If they block race, they can block racism. As you know, this logic falls apart in practice. It is much easier to prohibit people from describing themselves than to properly deal with the haters and bigots. These rules are not equally enforced across the board though. I honestly don't know how strict they are regarding race identification. It can't be too strict when the gamertag "Chink" (I'm not being racist, it's a real tag) was playing earlier tonight.
I am, however, 100% positive that Microsoft wouldn't allow GameJew as a gamertag. haha
According to his gamertag, Jesus has a higher reputation than me (go figure). At least my gamerscore is higher than JewMan's.

Anyway, good debate, man.
I'm off to bed. :)

[Xenogears V]

Man, we are back in Medioevo.

[chyottone]

Microsoft owns Live, they tell you the rules. If you don't accept, gtfo. Simple as that.

Really, stop bitching about it people. Regardless what you think is going on or what you think Microsoft is trying to do with this, nothing will change. Like I said, if you don't like the rules buy a ps3/wii or just don't use Live.

[sirxlaughs]

I really really don't think Marital status would be considered a taboo on Xbox Live. Seriously, Sesame Street covers that topic regularly even though Bob remained conspicously single over the years despite Linda's obvious advancements--sorry...lost my train of thought.

I don't know what Microsoft's take is on it. If I write it into my account and I get suspended for it, I wouldn't complain, though.

While Microsoft isn't (and probably would never) say they're going to reassess a policy having to do with acceptable/unacceptable speech, the exposure may bring them pause to consider why saying "lesbian" is grounds for banishment, but the gamertag "gaykiller" isn't (yes, it really exists on live).

It's not about speech. They can't monitor conversations and such. The policy was that the girl had "lesbian" in her profile. Microsoft said that's a no-no. Whether she's a muff-eater or a pole-smoker, they don't wanna know (vulgar, yes - to the point, also yes). Tags like "gaykiller" are listed as playing a few games for basically one or two days. Then their activity just disappears. Safe to say that they were either reported or caught.

I would argue that the view that matters most is the person who identifies themselves. You could extrapolate just as many false messages from saying "I'm a girl" compared to "I'm gay". In fairness, we would need to see this girl's profile to have a better idea. If she was inviting or suggestive in her demeanor, then I would fully agree with your point. If she simply stated "I'm gay" then the meanings people get from that would be speculation and not direct sexual conduct.

I agree, that's the most important view. Kind of how people say that it's more important how you view yourself than being worried about how others see you. However, in a private (yet public) gaming forum, the rules are set to keep order and to keep the focus on the main point - gaming. If I go to a public park and smoke, no one can tell me to stop. The park is public and there are no rules about smoking. If I go to a private park with signs that say "No Smoking", I can't smoke. No matter how much a part of my life smoking is, I just can't do it. Is it unfair to me? Not really. The park is private - members only. If you want to be a member, you follow the rules. If you want to do something else, go somewhere else. Microsoft's rules are there to be fair and even for everyone. I think there's a group called GamerChix or something. She could join them and look for any lesbians in there if that's what she really wanted to do.

I fully respect that school of thought. Probably because you have to have enrolled in it to play on Live at all.
But given all of the crap that you and I have both been exposed to on live--all the vile garbage that 12 years old spew while playing games they're not old enough to play, don't you think the reasoning for this girl's banishment is pretty darn trivial?

It may be trivial, but it's still against the rules. Trivial was when I got a ticket for not making a full stop at a Stop sign 2 blocks from my house. There was nothing I could say to the officer who wrote me up that would make me less guilty.

Nor do I. I've also been called the N word multiple times. It doesn't bother me either (I'm not black), but I know these words would be hurtful to some. The rules Microsoft puts in place don't help them. In my opinion, it silences the wrong people.

The rules and other parts of the system (review system) work pretty well. I've got plenty of players on my avoid list. Enough reports, and investigations happen. If someone is of the softer-skinned variety, then they just need to turn off the audio or mute people. Then there's always people who think they're everyone's parents. You shouldn't talk like that, or whatever. Just like the telephone company can't monitor what you say, they can control who you're allowed to call.


It's like I said, Microsoft is taking the easy way out. It's not that they want to keep gays in the closet of course, but if they can keep the topic of homosexuality off live, they'll keep the topic of homophobes off live. If they block race, they can block racism. As you know, this logic falls apart in practice. It is much easier to prohibit people from describing themselves than to properly deal with the haters and bigots. These rules are not equally enforced across the board though. I honestly don't know how strict they are regarding race identification. It can't be too strict when the gamertag "Chink" (I'm not being racist, it's a real tag) was playing earlier tonight.

I don't think it's taking the "easy way out." I think it's staying on point. Live is not an open discussion forum (unless you go to the online forums, I guess). Live is a gaming community. There's no reason to create problems in a community by giving people more things to debate, argue, or be bigots about. I don't know about Mr. Chink, but the word does have more than one meaning. Also, if no one's complained, then there's no reason to suspend him. If you actually did play with him, he should be on your list, and you can report him. Let's see how long after that he stays online. Given how sensitive the Asian community is with certain things (radio hosts, for example), I'm surprised no one's said anything.

According to his gamertag, Jesus has a higher reputation than me (go figure). At least my gamerscore is higher than JewMan's.

Anyway, good debate, man.
I'm off to bed. :)

Well, Jesus is a name. No problems there. You can't suspend someone who wants the gamertag Moses, Abraham, or Mohammad just because it was in a religious text. JewMan is another one of those tags that had a few days of fun on Live, and then probably got reported.
Technically, it's not breaking the rules until your caught. Just like that girl had lesbian in her profile until she got reported.
I don't think the rules will change. They've been in place for years, and have worked thus far. The only time it gets any media coverage is when some douchebag reporter smells controversy or wants to talk about what's "best for the kids."