A community for progressive issues, social justice and LGBT+ causes in media, gaming, entertainment and tech.
Official replacement for Reddit's r/GamerGhazi
Content should be articles, video essays, podcasts about topics relevant to the forum. No memes, single images or tweets/toots/... please!
Community rules:
Be respectful and civil with each other. Don't be a jerk. There is a real human being on the other side of your screen. See also the Blahaj.Zone Community Rules
No bigotry of any kind allowed. Making racist, sexist, trans-/homo-/queerphobic, otherwise demeaning and hateful comments is not ok. Disabilities and mental illnesses are not to be used as insults and should not be part of your comment unless speaking of your own or absolutely relevant.
No gatekeeping and being rude to people who don't agree with you. Leave “gamer” stereotypes out of your comment (e.g. sexless, neck bearded, teenaged, basement-dwelling, etc). Don't compare people to animals, or otherwise deny their humanity. Even if you think someone is the worst human on the planet, do not wish death or harm upon them.
No "justice porn". Posts regarding legal action and similar is allowed, but celebrating someone being harmed is not.
Contrarianism for its own sake is unnecessary and not welcome.
No planning operations, no brigading, no doxxing or similar activities allowed.
Absolutely no defense of GamerGate and other right-wing harassment campaigns, no TERFs and transphobia, racism, dismissing of war crimes and praise of fascists. This includes “JAQing off”, intentionally asking leading questions while pretending to be a neutral party. This also applies to other forms of authoritarianism and authoritarian or criminal actions by liberal or leftist governments.
NSFW threads, such as ones discussing erotic art, pornography and sex work, must be tagged as such.
Moderators can take action even if none of the rules above are broken.
Could also be to protect the organizers in that state. Teachers are being arrested for having banned books and it's not improbable to think a teacher might get arrested if the book fair they sponsored had banned books.
In the end, itll be the children who suffer unfortunately.
You don't side with the goon squad in that case. You send lawyers if you're about it.
Cute that you think teachers can afford lawyers
I don't. Why I suggested a company that takes in $1.6B be the one to pay for it (if their actions were "to protect teachers".)
Problem is, that's a good way for even a company the size of Scholastics to go under. Parents can repeatedly go at the company for the maximum amount, and are likely to win at every point until this gets taken to the Supreme Court
No actually, "the problem" is POC and LGBT people and topics being repressed, oppressed, and depressed.
How much money a "publisher" owned by bankers have doesn't concern me.
You're missing the fucking point, perhaps deliberately.
It is suicide for them to do as you suggest. Them doing that means a lot of people become jobless over a pointless gesture that ends up having zero impact on the issue of BME/LGBT rights and history because guess what? The same lawmakers that make these laws aren't fucking listening.
I don't believe they would go under and don't care if they do.
If they are choosing to cater to bigotry to avoid going under, then that is wrong.
If they have to cater to bigotry or go under (they don't) then not going under would be wrong.
To speak of missing points, though, some asshole suggested this hateful policy was potentially enacted to protect teachers and I brought up what would actually protect librarians and them. Now you're shitting about congress like we aren't 4 layers deep in hypothetical at this point and Scholastic was never trying to protect people so the point you are arguing it moot.
I don't believe they would go under and don't care if they do.
They absolutely would, and you may not care but hundreds of thousands of parents and kids worldwide do. Scholastics is one of the biggest publisher's for kids reading material out there.
If they are choosing to cater to bigotry to avoid going under, then that is wrong.
It's not that simple. The choice is either 'cater' or don't operate in that area at all. They don't get to pick and choose which laws to abide by.
To speak of missing points, though, some asshole suggested this hateful policy was potentially enacted to protect teachers and I brought up what would actually protect librarians and them.
'Some asshole'? Because they pointed out a reasonable explanation? And no, you didn't bring up something that would protect them; firstly the punishments going include the loss of teachers license (IE: they can never teach in a school in that state again) secondly because the state laws are so stacked against them that it would instead bankrupt scholastic. A mob of lawsuits can and will bury the publisher in legal fees.
So you can stop being so disrespectful to other people with other ideas.
Now you're shitting about congress like we aren't 4 layers deep in hypothetical at this point and Scholastic was never trying to protect people so the point you are arguing it moot.
Congress? I've been talking about state legislature, with a mix of Supreme Court, as that would be the only federal court that can strike down these laws as unconstitutional.
Hypothetical? Nah dude, these legal actions are already being abused to hell and back.
I'm not reading all that bud.
It wasn't to protect anyone and so it wasn't a reasonable explanation.
Fuck hate and fuck any justification or minimization of complicity with hate.