You dont have a right NOT to be offended (Akiba's Trip)

**Rowan** · 08-26-2014, 04:59 PM

I was recently browsing an article about a game that I'd recently purchased and started playing - Akibas Trip, and I also recently learned that there was an 'uproar' about some of the localisation text in the game. In case you didnt know, Akiba's Trip is a game where you fight vampires by stripping off their clothes (both male and female, k?) in the middle of a recreated Akibahara, Japan. Ill skip talking about the game and get straight to the point. Theres a feature in the game that mimic's twitter, 2chan etc, called 'Pitter'. Basically just a board for posting stuff, kinda like reddit actually. Anyway, an NPC in-game replied to another NPC saying "Nobody asked you, goddamned Trap!"

This has been regarded as a 'transgender slur' and XSEED has been slammed by 'fans' on twitter about this.

For more detailed information, read the full article here

Are people being a little too sensitive, or are people being really insensitive? Personally, I think people should get a fkn grip (I know, im a heterosexual white male, right?) But what I really dont understand is how it is the very same people who are not 'traps' who are taking offense? Ill repeat the title of this thread "you dont have the right not to be offended".

What is your take on it?

**nix** · 08-26-2014, 05:06 PM

**Alpha** · 08-26-2014, 05:40 PM

Has anyone ever said that you do have the right to not be offended?

No one has.

What people have said, here, and in other analogous situations that I imagine you're drawing from, is to be careful with words and actions. It is incredibly difficult to empathise with someone who takes offense at particular words and actions. Case in point, there's a story in the national news in NZ at the moment about a prominent fashion designer (and Dame) who featured Native American headdress. She called it something like "70s retro vibe", and seemed blithely unaware of the countless times this issue has been raised. (First Nations headdress being very sacred to the culture from which it originates.) I won't pretend to be super informed about this particular issue, given I've never even seen a Native American in the flesh let alone talked to one. But I know enough to understand that although the patterns and shape may seem interesting and innocuous to my culture, it is far more than that to another culture. A good comparison I read today was that between the headdress and war medals. It is considered highly inappropriate (in my culture) for someone to wear someone else's war medals. The exception is if you're a descendent of the person whose medals they were, and that person is no longer alive. In such cases, the person who did not earn them then may wear them, but only on the opposite side of the chest. These medals could conceivably be considered insignificant pieces of metal and ribbon to others not steeped in the same culture and who didn't grow up with the familial stories of heroism and sacrifice that attend these "pieces of metal and ribbon".

I'd find it offensive if someone sold someone else's war medals, or attempted to appropriate them as their own. I don't have a right to not be offended if someone does these things, and indeed I think there's no law actually preventing these things from happening, so they have a right to do them if they legally found themselves in possession of such medals. No one can stop me from wearing my grandfather's medals as though they are my own, short of ripping them off my chest, which may actually be assault. But just because I can, doesn't mean I should, or that I should get prissy when a decorated veteran takes issue with my actions.

Am I getting off topic? Marginally. The point is that just because you, or even a majority of people do not find something offensive and do indeed have the right to say or do it, does not preclude you from the repercussions of that. Firstly it shows immense insensitivity to those it does offend. It shows immense ignorance of another person's perspective. It shows lack of empathy. And it also completely degrades the legitimacy of your own feeling of being offended when it occurs to you. If you don't stand up and say "that's offensive to X", when it comes your turn to say "that's offensive to me", why should anyone care? There's never been an automatic right to not be offended by things. But it is a mark of wisdom and respect to other people to avoid saying and doing things that others may find offensive, especially when the benefit to you of saying things like "trap" is so ****ing small.

On that last point about the benefit of even using this term... Seriously, is that game any better because someone used a slur against transgender people? No, it's not. So all it has achieved by its existence in the game is that some people are offended and others are nonplussed. That represents a net loss to society. Well ****ing done. A+

**Rowan** · 08-26-2014, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by Alpha

Has anyone ever said that you do have the right to not be offended?

No one has.

What people have said, here, and in other analogous situations that I imagine you're drawing from, is to be careful with words and actions. It is incredibly difficult to empathise with someone who takes offense at particular words and actions. Case in point, there's a story in the national news in NZ at the moment about a prominent fashion designer (and Dame) who featured Native American headdress. She called it something like "70s retro vibe", and seemed blithely unaware of the countless times this issue has been raised. (First Nations headdress being very sacred to the culture from which it originates.) I won't pretend to be super informed about this particular issue, given I've never even seen a Native American in the flesh let alone talked to one. But I know enough to understand that although the patterns and shape may seem interesting and innocuous to my culture, it is far more than that to another culture. A good comparison I read today was that between the headdress and war medals. It is considered highly inappropriate (in my culture) for someone to wear someone else's war medals. The exception is if you're a descendent of the person whose medals they were, and that person is no longer alive. In such cases, the person who did not earn them then may wear them, but only on the opposite side of the chest. These medals could conceivably be considered insignificant pieces of metal and ribbon to others not steeped in the same culture and who didn't grow up with the familial stories of heroism and sacrifice that attend these "pieces of metal and ribbon".

I'd find it offensive if someone sold someone else's war medals, or attempted to appropriate them as their own. I don't have a right to not be offended if someone does these things, and indeed I think there's no law actually preventing these things from happening, so they have a right to do them if they legally found themselves in possession of such medals. No one can stop me from wearing my grandfather's medals as though they are my own, short of ripping them off my chest, which may actually be assault. But just because I can, doesn't mean I should, or that I should get prissy when a decorated veteran takes issue with my actions.

Am I getting off topic? Marginally. The point is that just because you, or even a majority of people do not find something offensive and do indeed have the right to say or do it, does not preclude you from the repercussions of that. Firstly it shows immense insensitivity to those it does offend. It shows immense ignorance of another person's perspective. It shows lack of empathy. And it also completely degrades the legitimacy of your own feeling of being offended when it occurs to you. If you don't stand up and say "that's offensive to X", when it comes your turn to say "that's offensive to me", why should anyone care? There's never been an automatic right to not be offended by things. But it is a mark of wisdom and respect to other people to avoid saying and doing things that others may find offensive, especially when the benefit to you of saying things like "trap" is so ****ing small.

On that last point about the benefit of even using this term... Seriously, is that game any better because someone used a slur against transgender people? No, it's not. So all it has achieved by its existence in the game is that some people are offended and others are nonplussed. That represents a net loss to society. Well ****ing done. A+

You need a cape, mask and a symbol. Seriously. You being offended about things that have nothing to do with you (someone else selling their own property etc) is borderline psychopathic behaviour. If you also believe that I should face repurcussions from NOT finding something offensive, then you're out of your mind, especially when its nothing to do with me. You're acting like im the guy who works for the localisation team, who basically did his job. I think its accurate portrail of the online community, being rash and somewhat negative without any concern or regard for the feelings of others. People dont tend to hold back when its online and often called far worse things, so I dont see how why its more offensive to adress someone as an idiot of ****ing ****, then just saying trap. Both will offend people, but for some reason its considered more offensive when talking about someones gender or someones natioanlity. I really dont understand. Maybe I am the one with sociopathic behaviour, i just see things how they are. People choose to be offended by things that have nothing to do with them. Who would have thought someone could be offended by an NPC addressing the gender of another NPC. I suppose the next complaint will be that there are no transgender characters included in the game? Or no same sex marriage? You attribute to the plethora of eggshells developers and scenario writers have to walk on getting through production. Of course its wise not to be mean to others, thats a lesson I learned long ago, but what the hell is happening here thats so bad or different from anything else?

Also, is lack of empathy really such a bad thing? Do people honestly need to be coddled when they fall over and hurt their leg? or get called a name? Geeze, give me a break.

**Halie** · 08-26-2014, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Rowan

Also, is lack of empathy really such a bad thing? Do people honestly need to be coddled when they fall over and hurt their leg? or get called a name? Geeze, give me a break.

Uh, yeah? That is borderline psychopathic. Just because a person isn't the target of a slur doesn't mean they don't have the right to be offended by it. Especially when that person has a certain privilege which, instead of turning a blind eye, could use that privilege to stand up for those who can't, because unfortunately there are people who are ignored (or in this case attacked) due to their gender, race, etc. Are you so devoid of empathy that, not only are you content to watch that happen to others and not care, but also that you would actively complain about others being offended about something that is actually derogatory? Your logic is like, hey, my house isn't on fire so the world doesn't need fire extinguishers. And then when someone's house actually is on fire you're like, whatever, mine's fine. And then someone tries to help said person put out the fire, and you're like, "oh my god, do you all need to be coddled? Do you really need to actually go so far as calling the fire department? Geeze, gimme a break."

You are literally offended by other people being offended??

**Rowan** · 08-26-2014, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by Halie

Your logic is like, hey, my house isn't on fire so the world doesn't need fire extinguishers.

Umm, **** no? That scenario has absolutely nothing to do with anything we are talking about here. How do you go from being offended to "my house isn't on fire, **** fire extinguishers"?

Originally Posted by Halie

You are literally offended by other people being offended??

Lets say I am.

Wheres your empathy for me? Oh thats right, you dont have any because it has to be an issue that you deem worthy of being offended by. Back where we started.

**Heartless Angel** · 08-27-2014, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by Halie

Uh, yeah? That is borderline psychopathic.

Is THAT a bad thing? If so, I'm in trouble, because I've long since crossed that border.

**Alpha** · 08-26-2014, 07:25 PM

You don't find the commodification of war medals offensive? Well cool, but some people do. Notice I never said that people can't or shouldn't do it, just that a lot of people, myself included, do find it offensive. Likewise, I didn't say that a video game translator can't or shouldn't use the word "trap" to deliberately emulate an offensive Japanese NPC in a video game. On the contrary, you'd be suprised how liberal I am about this given my statements. Censorship sucks. I'm just saying: 1. you reap what you sow, so don't act surprised when people are offended. 2. It is really hard to imagine being offended by something that you personally don't find offensive. Like really hard. Telling people to "get over it" or telling them that they're being "insensitive" is not constructive at all. What does that achieve, really?

**Zargabaath** · 08-26-2014, 07:30 PM

Alpha is talking about being offended on principle. If there is something a person finds wrong, yet unrelated to them, they can still be offended. In a way it kind of deals with morality. In this situation it is with sexism. While Alpha and I may have differing views in certain areas of sexism, (if it is right or wrong to hire more females for "equal opportunity"), derogatory language I feel we have common ground.

To change course, who knows if this was the concept that the text was trying to convey in Japanese. I doubt I can take this game seriously but, the developers looked to develop a slew of different character-types, and therefore created someone who would use such a slur. This reminds me of Django Unchained and how there were people offended by the "liberal" use of n*****. A) Django being a movie which is considered to be art while only a few games by the mass gamer audience view them as art. It was required in portraying citizens of the deep south. While that npc is just a unimportant, probably random, piece of coding without any artistic purpose.

People can get upset over it, even if they aren't transgender. At the same time the company can add whatever they want to their game yet expect consequences (good or bad). In this case more blame may go to XSeed since they translated the script. I wonder if the developer or publisher looked over the final script. I would in my games, if I ever made any, to make sure my ideas were properly translated.

**Rowan** · 08-26-2014, 07:51 PM

Okay, I see your point now Alpha. Although I have to say that the commodification of any item, even something as valuable as a war medal (both cash wise and personally), you should not judge the person selling them so harshly since while it may appear as if they dont care about them, they may be in dire need of money, as many veterans of war ended up homeless and without anything/anyone to support them once they came back (assuming they are veterans).

My point is that I am harshly against censorship. Thats it. I would prefer they left stuff like that in especially if it was intended and apart of the original script, than remove it to appease the few who might be offended by it.

@zargbaath, this NPC doesn't even have a character model. It is an online persona of someone participating in 'pitter' conversation. It such a small part of the game that is easily looked over, especially since its not compulsory to view the 'pitter' feed at all during the game.

and just for the record, i dont think anybody ought to be hired based on their gender. I think the person who best suits the roll, should get the job.

**Rowan** · 08-27-2014, 05:13 AM

Way to make fun of psychopaths, halie. Using it in a derogatory sense, addressing people by their mentality. Such a shame.

**Heartless Angel** · 08-27-2014, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Rowan

Way to make fun of psychopaths, halie. Using it in a derogatory sense, addressing people by their mentality. Such a shame.

In this particular case, I think that's fairly safe. As a sociopath, I can say most us don't really give a flying **** what people think of us, as we see them as inferiors, incapable of even comprehending our superiority. I generally take it as a compliment when somebody tries to offend me by making fun of sociopaths.

Originally Posted by Unknown Entity

Empathy is both a strength and a weakness. It's a reward and a penalty. I don't have time to spend my entire day stroking my empathy ego, but that's not to say that there aren't things that passionately piss me off. People need to keep their empathy disciplined, and know when they're fighting for the right cause.

Apathy is SO much simpler though. It's also amusing fairly frequently when you encounter people who don't really understand it. Really nothing makes me laugh more than emotional people trying to find normal emotional motivations for my actions. They're adorable when their brains hurt.

On topic, it really annoys the shit out of me when people get butthurt about stuff like this. I'm reminded of A Stephen Fry quote, "It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so ****ing what."

You are entitled to feel whatever emotions you like, nobody else is obligated to give a shit. If people want to get butthurt, let them. Don't change a damn thing to accommodate them. All you teach them is that whining gets them what they want.

**01habbo** · 08-27-2014, 11:09 AM

I don't think it is a people don't have a right to complain thing, that's just silly everyone has a right to complain it's freedom of speech. What a boring world we would be in if people didn't complain. I think it's more of people being ignorant of what is insulting and what isn't to groups of people.

Lets take this video for example:

I remember lots of people complaining that this was discriminatory towards the Japanese and insulting, Avril Lavigne responded in a tweet that she loves Japan and and worked with the Japanese on this video she even had a Japanese producer. Also the video had good reviews in Tokyo, mostly the Japanese liked the video and didn't find it insulting.

Generally people's hearts are in the right place it's just that they jump before actually looking at the context. Concerning the game I don't see why certain words can't be used, I don't see why things should be censored just to keep people happy. It might be offensive to some people but I see games not only as entertainment but they are there as a story and to teach. If these words are censored then there is no discussion and no one learns anything.

**Unknown Entity** · 08-27-2014, 01:36 PM

I'm not easily offended, and I do think sometimes people can be far too sensitive. If you look around you, there's offensive and controversial content everywhere. Akiba's Trip? A game where you kill your enemies by forcefully ripping their clothes off? Young looking, slightly oversexulised characters? And you're offended by a quip? Get a grip.

God of War Ascension creators, Joystiq, had to rename one of the Trophies earned in the game to "Bros before Foes", as people waved the misogynistic banners over "Bros before Hoes." Personally, it didn't bother me - eighteen rated game, has always been known for being a sexist game, blah blah blah. I guess people had the right to be offended, but was it really a big enough of a deal to have it's named changed? Tomb Raider has a trophy called "Widow Maker", earned by killing forty people with a shotgun - and guess what? There's not a single female enemy in Tomb Raider. Why? Is killing men just that much fun? No one said anything about the "Snake Beater" trophy in the Metal Gear Solid 2 HD remake either, because hey! Who's offended by jerking off slang?

When it comes down to rights, yes, everyone has the right to be offended if they feel that way. But jumping the gun just because you heard something you didn't like just causes unnecessary drama. I would never sell medals my grandparents received for their war time efforts, as I think it would dishonour their memory, and for the sake of argument here, yes, I'd find it offensive. But I wouldn't get upset if someone else sold their grandparents medals - that's not my decision to make, I won't judge, and I'd understand that it must be a hard thing to have to do.

Empathy is both a strength and a weakness. It's a reward and a penalty. I don't have time to spend my entire day stroking my empathy ego, but that's not to say that there aren't things that passionately piss me off. People need to keep their empathy disciplined, and know when they're fighting for the right cause.

**Alpha** · 08-27-2014, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Unknown Entity

...and know when they're fighting for the right cause.

OK, cool. So when's that? Is there some kind of guideline? Are there "right" and "wrong" things to be offended about?

**Rowan** · 08-27-2014, 03:33 PM

Some of you misunderstand me, some of you dont. When I say you dont have the right not to be offended, dont confuse that with "you have no right to be offended". The difference is, while you have the right to be offended, what you dont have the right for is to demand whatever it was that offended you to be censored. That is the issue here. And quite frankly, if something as little as an NPC adressing the gender of a character in a video game about stripping people's clothes off is a concern of yours, then you have a very ****ing comfortable little life you are living.

**Alpha** · 08-27-2014, 03:39 PM

adressing the gender of a character in a video game about stripping people's clothes off is a concern of yours, then you have a very ****ing comfortable little life you are living.

I feel like I'm repeating myself now. Don't presume that because you do not find something offensive, that it cannot be (very) offensive to someone else. That's why I used the example of the First Nations headdress. Seems innocuous to me, but it really is not.

**Rowan** · 08-27-2014, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Alpha

I feel like I'm repeating myself now. Don't presume that because you do not find something offensive, that it cannot be (very) offensive to someone else. That's why I used the example of the First Nations headdress. Seems innocuous to me, but it really is not.

And as I earlier stated, I am offended that those people are offended. Can you really find it that hard to believe given my current posts on the topic?

**Unknown Entity** · 08-27-2014, 04:25 PM

I <3 Stephen Fry.

Originally Posted by Alpha

OK, cool. So when's that? Is there some kind of guideline? Are there "right" and "wrong" things to be offended about?

It's purely perception based, and not everyone will be moved by the same things. Using my previous example, I'm not offended by those trophies, but other people were. Now, between complaining about insignificant trophies for a video game, why not complain about something in the bigger picture (preferably one away from a television or monitor). Like wage reductions, women's rights, LGBT rights, freedom of speech, the Gaza and Israel conflict, food stamps, benefits, taxes, global warming, religion, cancer, etc.

Out of everything someone can be offended by, lets all pick the real first world problems to get pissed off about, like trophies, eh?

War medals. As respectful as you think you should be with them, you have to think to yourself: how were they earned? Because I bet there's another side to the coin in which another family grieved their losses, and would have been offended by the idea of someone earning medals for their "bravery" which resulted in said loss. I've held the medals and heard the stories, and all that happens is my heart feels heavier. With the pride of earning that medal, some tough decisions and actions had to have been made. Perception is everything.