Just going to add to the hate-pile; why the hell was this deemed worthy of a link? The guy rates implied homosexuality as "creepier" than implied bestiality. The fuck?
This is a case of not one but two people reaching, and reaching badly at that, just to make their daily posting quota.
The amount of gay-bashing in this article is shocking. Okay, so Leon and Luis? Never took them as gay lovers but this jackass not only detects a faint homosexuality but he then declares it as a four-star level of discomfort. Why? They're just two men who barely interact in a video game. But even if they were gay lovers, I don't see how this is at all "uncomfortable" or "wrong." Kotaku should be ashamed for advertising this sick editorial of hate.
@jpd44: I'm not sure what's more disturbing, that, or the fact that this guy writes like HE'S ACTUALLY FUNNY.
But yeah, I didn't understand how he even came up with half that crap, let alone acted all 'hahagaylol' about it. It's not just somewhat of an editorial of hate, its a shitty and poorly written piece of garbage. I swore Kotaku was above publishing this sort of stuff.
@jpd44: Yup, agreed. The guy seems to look for - or maybe his warped mind just sees - 'creepiness' in everything. I think the fact that he detects paedophilia everywhere says more about him.
@stingjc: Or you were born past 1985. I think you really have to have been around to understand what Kurt Cobain was about or why this is so odd.
It's like trying to explain the 1980s to someone that wasn't there. All they can think of is crap cartoons and neon, when in reality it was really something very different.
@Paul_Is_Drunk: Don't forget the poofy hair. I lived the 80s, I listened to his music, and I don't get the Cobain thing either. He's dead. So what? Why is that a big deal? Games are filled with dead people.
@Paul_Is_Drunk: I was indeed born pre-1985. I just don't see his glamour, I guess. Committing suicide doesn't make someone immortal in my mind, I guess.
@Baff: The first Nirvana album was released in 1989. The reason they say you have to be born pre-1985 is because otherwise you weren't old enough to be a fan while he was still alive. He's definitely a 90s thing.
I really don't see anything creepy going on in most of the pairings he's listed. Once you're able to look past what's going on on the outside and understand -why- these characters interact with each other in the way that they do, they aren't that 'uncomfortable' at all.
Luke (a kid) is Professor Layton's (cool older puzzle-solvin' dude) apprentice -- it was pretty commonplace back during the Victorian-Edwardian era to have children in these occupations. Big Daddies only follow Little Sisters around to protect them from anyone that might do them harm... so in a sense they're kind of like huge scubagear-wearing guard dogs than anything. The whole Leon-Ashley thing is just a one-sided and really awkward flirtfest between the two characters. We've all been there, haven't we?
... but hey, I'm with you and that one guy on the whole puppeteering the ghost of Cobain in GH5 being awkward thing. Now THAT gives off some serious creepy vibes for me. :<
I honestly don't know why Layton and Luke are considered creepy. What's REALLY creepy is anyone thinking or insinuating anything between a grown man and a child when clearly, there is none.
@Miguel Angel Portela: Yeah, honestly. There've been hints that Layton is pretty much Luke's adoptive father or maybe guardian of some sort, at least from what I gathered from the first two games. Maybe more would be revealed later, but it's obviously a teacher and student relationship, and hardly creepy.
@kagekiri: Really though. I mean it seems a little over the top, what i'm about to say that is but here goes. It's that attitude of witch hunting guardians that make people staying away from helping kids. As far as media goes, what of Batman and Robin? Willy Wonka (pre-Johnny Depp) It's something so common but it seems this day in age if you're too good of a father figure or mother figure you MUST have some sick ulterior motive, which really, is a sick thing to think about.
I love the modern presumption of paedofilia. Wait, I mean I don't love it. Why do we never have male primary teachers? Why do a lot of kids have no male role models? It's because normal men have become terrified to be seen with kids.
So many people, when they see a man alone with a kid for any period of time, they think dirty.
'Look at that man who's alwasy with that underage boy, that's not right.'
'Dude, that's his godson. His dad's in hospital, his mom's away.'
'Probably bones him all night long, the filthy fucker.'
@Agumen: Yeah. There have been a few studies that show that men ARE afraid to be seen with children who aren't their own. A man will hesitate to help a hurt child because it means he has to touch the child and anyone witnessing will assume he's a pedophile. A sad mark of our times and our insane notions of "for the children" protectionism.
@tdogg241: How is an article that is making fun of something automatically considered intolerant? I'm tired of this attitude that if anyone laughs about something it makes them a hater.
At what point in the article does the writer call for all proud straight people to run the gays out of town?
I'm serious! Underline the passage that uses bible quotes as justification for sweeping legislation denying gays the same basic rights and freedoms that other people enjoy.
Where in the article does he call for violence against people of the homosexual lifestyle? Show me the part of the article that does anything more serious than point and laugh.
This isn't homophobia, people. Homophobia is real, it is wrong, it is DANGEROUS (unlike this article) and deserves your hatred. This article, on the other hand, is a bit of silliness written by a guy who gets his kicks out of telling bum-sex jokes.
When did we all become such a dainty, fragile little bunch of Faberge eggs?
@TitillatedOcelot: Politicians, rabble-rousers, and fundamentalists who DO want to take away the rights and freedoms of gay people have been comparing gays to pedophiles, describing gay relationships as creepy or deviant, and generally relying on the gross-out factor for decades if not centuries. In fact, it's one of the few weapons left in their arsenal.
Why does it still work to play on those emotions and squick out Joe Average Undecided Voter who's not so sure he's OK with anything gay? Because of articles like this. Obviously, everyone realizes it's "just supposed to be a little joke." But it's a joke that equates gay realtionships between consenting adults with pedophilia.
Let's count.
Relationships in that article that are made fun of because of pedo-ish age differences: 4
Relationships in that article that are made fun of because it's two men being too close, or acting too gay: 4
Other creepy stuff (cloud-turtle relationships, imps riding around on your back, tiny AI hologram plugging in your head): 3
Kurt's Ghost: 1
I'm sure if the author could have found some bestiality examples, or incest, he would have included those as well. Right alongside homosexuality -- it's all the same, right? Wrong. You know what wouldn't have made the list? Heterosexual and lesbian relationships between adults, because they're not inherently "creepy" to the author's mindset. Double standards much? And that mindset is what allows ALL kinds of homophobia to keep flourishing. It's worth speaking out against, it's not worth defending.
@halfrobo: But somehow it's perfectly ok for you to lump this guy in with (in your very words ) "Politicians, rabble-rousers, and fundamentalists who DO want to take away the rights and freedoms of gay people"?
There is as about as much evidence connecting this guy's article to those groups you've mentioned as there is evidence to suggest that all gays are pedophiles. Translation: you, yourself have just made a logical leap of faith on almost no evidence.
You know what is really worth defending? The right to make a joke at another person's expense. I don't want to live in a world where we can only say things that don't offend anyone. Wanna know why? Because there is no such thing as something you can say that isn't going to offend someone. What a flat, flavourless world we would live in should we ever manage to filter everything we say to the point where it agrees with the sensibilities of SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE. It will never happen.
If you really want to make someone stop making fun of you, learn to laugh at yourself. And then fire a joke back at them. If they can't take it, you're the better man.
Homophobia exists, and I hate it. I've had two good friends of mine yelled at and physically attacked for being gay. They weren't doing anything other than holding hands when the wrong car went by. THAT is homophobia.
But to suggest that this guy is EXACTLY LIKE the worst gay-bashers in the world is akin to suggesting that every kid caught stealing a chocolate bar is a mass-murderer waiting to happen.
We come down on homophobes for senselessly lumping people into a category, and yet read some of the posts here. They're senselessly lumping people into a category.
@namesRhard: I know. But sometimes things get too serious. At that point you need to find a laugh wherever you can find it. Even if it is at your own expense.
@TitillatedOcelot: You're reading a lot into my statement. I said this article is an example of what gives ammunition to bigots who want to take away people's rights. I never suggested (duh, does that have to be pointed out?) that the article writer IS, himself, a fundamentalist politician or rabble-rousing loon. Like I said, and I'll say it again, it's the attitude that's being promoted by this article that makes it EASIER for bigots to get away with what they do. You're right, that's not the same thing. It's not "exactly like," and nobody's arguing that except the straw phantom you're fighting against. But it's part of the bigger picture, and it also sucks.
Racist jokes that rely on stereotypes about black people or Latinos being lazy or shiftless or having tons of kids and being on welfare -- they're also "jokes and someone's expense." And also supports lots of really bigoted political attacks that really do affect people's lives. Would you defend them in the same way? Jokes don't just "exist" in some separate safe space that doesn't affect how people actually get yelled at and physically attacked. Yes, it's different, but it's related. There are effects. A racist joke is not just a "harmless joke" with no real effect on anyone and no link at all to violence. Neither is a homophobic joke. I believe in free speech and people's right to make all kinds of offensive jokes -- and I believe in everyone's else's right to exercise free speech and call out how messed up and bigoted it is. Intolerance shouldn't be silently tolerated.
I agree with abyssino1337 said below, about jokes between friends and how there's a line, especially in public, where the words and publications and attitudes we put out there create our culture and what it will and won't tolerate.
@kainzero: Oh of course. Speaking from experience, people object more when one of you is gay, and you're hanging out with your straight friend. Because you're obviously going to "convert" said straight friend.
Last time I checked, gay people and religious zealots were two different things.
As someone who never worshiped Nirvana, getting upset over Kurt Cobain appearing in a videogame seems out of place.
Yeah, he was a great musician (by other peoples' taste) and he killed himself?
...So?
Him being in Guitar Hero can be viewed as a homage to what a big artist he actually was. If he hadn't been, then would Activision bother to try and cash in on him?
Shit, if this freaks you out, then all these movies being made about people who are dead. Let's call "Public Enemies" a crime against humanity, because its about the gangster John Dillinger who is, believe it or not, dead.
I guess we should feal appalled about "Downfall" staring Bruno Ganz, because it's being inconsiderate of Adolf Hitler to make a movie about him.
And I guess we should stop using any imagery containing Michael Jackson, because, y'know, he's dead too.
Books, movies, music, games,
They should all stop featuring dead people, because doing so makes us all feel uncomfortable, right?
Or does that only apply to Kurt Cobain?
Let's all get the singer of Weezer to stop singing about himself looking like Buddy Holly, because the comparison is disrespectful of the dead.
I really don't understand what this is all about and I agree with you completely. Guitar Hero, like so many other this, is fantasy and fiction. In this particular reality presented by the game, Kurt Cobain is still alive and you, the player, are a rock god. Clearly it doesn't reflect on reality so why is it so creepy?
@ShadowOdin of dubious snowiness: I'm assuming it upsets people because Cobain is more in the public's current consciousness. As is Jackson. And to my knowledge the only people TRULY angered by Cobain's avatar are Love and her attorney. Others just seem to feel mild discomfort because it feels to them like they're using their dead pappy to play a game. It's a big deal to them because they grew up with Nirvana.
I can watch Saving Private Ryan and think that it was very entertaining but vets in the theater were visibly upset while watching it because it hit too close to home with them. It got under their skin and made them relive the stress they endured decades ago.
I don't really condemn or condone it but I can understand why it's bothering some people.
Nobody gives shit that Cobain and Cash are in the game. We take issue with the fact that you can make them prance around on stage to a Flava Flav song shoting "Yeeee boyyy!".
ShadowOdin of dubious snowiness promoted this comment
bkchurch: The one guy who didn't buy Modern Warfare 2 was starred
bkchurch: The one guy who didn't buy Modern Warfare 2 was unstarred
I can make Darth Vader fight little girls wielding tonfas.
I have a game where one of the most important men in Japanese history sings (and dances) on the battlefield about how he built a castle in one day.
SquareEnix is releasing a game where the most important god of Norse mythology can turn into a horse.
It's a game. Cobain is an avatar. It's a bonus. You can play him if you want.
Does it matter if you can use him on songs that isn't his own?
I can make a female vocalist in Rockband. Should I be upset when said vocalist have to sing Bon Jovi's "Living on a prayer" with a male voice?
What if they made Kurt Cobain a playable character in the first Super Mario Bros?
Would people be upset over the fact that he would be able to jump much higher than he should?
That he would be able to shoot fireballs when touching certain flowers.
Maybe he should just stop as soon as he reaches the first pipe, because it's too high for him to pass.
And then, when he gets the mushroom, he goes high?
It's a game. So what if Johnny Cash is singing Linkin Park.
If you're busy looking at the avatars while playing Guitar Hero, then you're doing it wrong.
09/16/09
This is a case of not one but two people reaching, and reaching badly at that, just to make their daily posting quota.
09/16/09
09/16/09
/thread
09/16/09
09/16/09
Jade and her uncle Pey'j the pig from Beyond Good and Evil;
The Nameless One and sidekick Morte the flying skull from Planescape: Torment.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
But yeah, I didn't understand how he even came up with half that crap, let alone acted all 'hahagaylol' about it. It's not just somewhat of an editorial of hate, its a shitty and poorly written piece of garbage. I swore Kotaku was above publishing this sort of stuff.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
It's like trying to explain the 1980s to someone that wasn't there. All they can think of is crap cartoons and neon, when in reality it was really something very different.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
Cobain was more of a 90s thing anyway.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
Luke (a kid) is Professor Layton's (cool older puzzle-solvin' dude) apprentice -- it was pretty commonplace back during the Victorian-Edwardian era to have children in these occupations. Big Daddies only follow Little Sisters around to protect them from anyone that might do them harm... so in a sense they're kind of like huge scubagear-wearing guard dogs than anything. The whole Leon-Ashley thing is just a one-sided and really awkward flirtfest between the two characters. We've all been there, haven't we?
... but hey, I'm with you and that one guy on the whole puppeteering the ghost of Cobain in GH5 being awkward thing. Now THAT gives off some serious creepy vibes for me. :<
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
So many people, when they see a man alone with a kid for any period of time, they think dirty.
'Look at that man who's alwasy with that underage boy, that's not right.'
'Dude, that's his godson. His dad's in hospital, his mom's away.'
'Probably bones him all night long, the filthy fucker.'
What the fuck is wrong with you people.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
At what point in the article does the writer call for all proud straight people to run the gays out of town?
I'm serious! Underline the passage that uses bible quotes as justification for sweeping legislation denying gays the same basic rights and freedoms that other people enjoy.
Where in the article does he call for violence against people of the homosexual lifestyle? Show me the part of the article that does anything more serious than point and laugh.
This isn't homophobia, people. Homophobia is real, it is wrong, it is DANGEROUS (unlike this article) and deserves your hatred. This article, on the other hand, is a bit of silliness written by a guy who gets his kicks out of telling bum-sex jokes.
When did we all become such a dainty, fragile little bunch of Faberge eggs?
09/16/09
Why does it still work to play on those emotions and squick out Joe Average Undecided Voter who's not so sure he's OK with anything gay? Because of articles like this. Obviously, everyone realizes it's "just supposed to be a little joke." But it's a joke that equates gay realtionships between consenting adults with pedophilia.
Let's count.
Relationships in that article that are made fun of because of pedo-ish age differences: 4
Relationships in that article that are made fun of because it's two men being too close, or acting too gay: 4
Other creepy stuff (cloud-turtle relationships, imps riding around on your back, tiny AI hologram plugging in your head): 3
Kurt's Ghost: 1
I'm sure if the author could have found some bestiality examples, or incest, he would have included those as well. Right alongside homosexuality -- it's all the same, right? Wrong. You know what wouldn't have made the list? Heterosexual and lesbian relationships between adults, because they're not inherently "creepy" to the author's mindset. Double standards much? And that mindset is what allows ALL kinds of homophobia to keep flourishing. It's worth speaking out against, it's not worth defending.
09/16/09
There is as about as much evidence connecting this guy's article to those groups you've mentioned as there is evidence to suggest that all gays are pedophiles. Translation: you, yourself have just made a logical leap of faith on almost no evidence.
You know what is really worth defending? The right to make a joke at another person's expense. I don't want to live in a world where we can only say things that don't offend anyone. Wanna know why? Because there is no such thing as something you can say that isn't going to offend someone. What a flat, flavourless world we would live in should we ever manage to filter everything we say to the point where it agrees with the sensibilities of SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE. It will never happen.
If you really want to make someone stop making fun of you, learn to laugh at yourself. And then fire a joke back at them. If they can't take it, you're the better man.
Homophobia exists, and I hate it. I've had two good friends of mine yelled at and physically attacked for being gay. They weren't doing anything other than holding hands when the wrong car went by. THAT is homophobia.
But to suggest that this guy is EXACTLY LIKE the worst gay-bashers in the world is akin to suggesting that every kid caught stealing a chocolate bar is a mass-murderer waiting to happen.
We come down on homophobes for senselessly lumping people into a category, and yet read some of the posts here. They're senselessly lumping people into a category.
09/16/09
09/16/09
For the record, at no point did I say the jokes were any good!
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/17/09
Racist jokes that rely on stereotypes about black people or Latinos being lazy or shiftless or having tons of kids and being on welfare -- they're also "jokes and someone's expense." And also supports lots of really bigoted political attacks that really do affect people's lives. Would you defend them in the same way? Jokes don't just "exist" in some separate safe space that doesn't affect how people actually get yelled at and physically attacked. Yes, it's different, but it's related. There are effects. A racist joke is not just a "harmless joke" with no real effect on anyone and no link at all to violence. Neither is a homophobic joke. I believe in free speech and people's right to make all kinds of offensive jokes -- and I believe in everyone's else's right to exercise free speech and call out how messed up and bigoted it is. Intolerance shouldn't be silently tolerated.
I agree with abyssino1337 said below, about jokes between friends and how there's a line, especially in public, where the words and publications and attitudes we put out there create our culture and what it will and won't tolerate.
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
09/16/09
Last time I checked, gay people and religious zealots were two different things.
09/16/09
09/16/09
Yeah, he was a great musician (by other peoples' taste) and he killed himself?
...So?
Him being in Guitar Hero can be viewed as a homage to what a big artist he actually was. If he hadn't been, then would Activision bother to try and cash in on him?
Shit, if this freaks you out, then all these movies being made about people who are dead. Let's call "Public Enemies" a crime against humanity, because its about the gangster John Dillinger who is, believe it or not, dead.
I guess we should feal appalled about "Downfall" staring Bruno Ganz, because it's being inconsiderate of Adolf Hitler to make a movie about him.
And I guess we should stop using any imagery containing Michael Jackson, because, y'know, he's dead too.
Books, movies, music, games,
They should all stop featuring dead people, because doing so makes us all feel uncomfortable, right?
Or does that only apply to Kurt Cobain?
Let's all get the singer of Weezer to stop singing about himself looking like Buddy Holly, because the comparison is disrespectful of the dead.
09/16/09
I really don't understand what this is all about and I agree with you completely. Guitar Hero, like so many other this, is fantasy and fiction. In this particular reality presented by the game, Kurt Cobain is still alive and you, the player, are a rock god. Clearly it doesn't reflect on reality so why is it so creepy?
09/16/09
I can watch Saving Private Ryan and think that it was very entertaining but vets in the theater were visibly upset while watching it because it hit too close to home with them. It got under their skin and made them relive the stress they endured decades ago.
I don't really condemn or condone it but I can understand why it's bothering some people.
09/16/09
Nobody gives shit that Cobain and Cash are in the game. We take issue with the fact that you can make them prance around on stage to a Flava Flav song shoting "Yeeee boyyy!".
Research shit before you try to make an argument.
09/16/09
I can make Darth Vader fight little girls wielding tonfas.
I have a game where one of the most important men in Japanese history sings (and dances) on the battlefield about how he built a castle in one day.
SquareEnix is releasing a game where the most important god of Norse mythology can turn into a horse.
It's a game. Cobain is an avatar. It's a bonus. You can play him if you want.
Does it matter if you can use him on songs that isn't his own?
I can make a female vocalist in Rockband. Should I be upset when said vocalist have to sing Bon Jovi's "Living on a prayer" with a male voice?
What if they made Kurt Cobain a playable character in the first Super Mario Bros?
Would people be upset over the fact that he would be able to jump much higher than he should?
That he would be able to shoot fireballs when touching certain flowers.
Maybe he should just stop as soon as he reaches the first pipe, because it's too high for him to pass.
And then, when he gets the mushroom, he goes high?
It's a game. So what if Johnny Cash is singing Linkin Park.
If you're busy looking at the avatars while playing Guitar Hero, then you're doing it wrong.