Wings of Scotland court case

Why is the ability of girls to play a computer game not likely to be the same as the ability of gay males? That sounds a bit sexist. I don't think video games have much of a physical strength requirement?

Are you serious? Really? You cannot see that the comment is derogatory to both girls and gay men?

Setting aside any saving "Alan Partridge" context it clearly means some games are too difficult for girls( by which I assume he meant females under 16 , but who knows) and gay men of all ages.

Clearly some games will be too difficult for boys and girls due to age and it would be fine so say "skill level age 12 and above"

That kind of surprising interpretation happens when you have a highly polarising character like Campbell.

For the record, the comment can be found below this article:

www.eurogamer.net/articles/metal-slug-7-review

Beginner is for girls and homosexuals, but forgiveable for a reviewer with limited time who needs to see as much of the game as possible.

I'm surprised that people interpret that comment to mean other than girls and homosexuals having in common that they're both in a "lesser" category. Even if it's something as minor as the ability to play video games

I'm utterly baffled at anyone interpreting in any other way - neither of them are any good with difficult games.

Campbell argued that it was taken out of context. It is the sort of comment Steve Coogan whilst in character as Alan Partridge would say and no-one would think it was Steve Coogan's opinion. Without the context one can't say whether Campbell was being himself or a character.

I'm surprised that people interpret that comment to mean other than girls and homosexuals having in common that they're both in a "lesser" category. Even if it's something as minor as the ability to play video games.

twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1110866392184774656

Mr Sandison says Kezia Dugdale is trying to argue - like Humpty Dumpty - that words should mean just what she chooses them to mean. He says she can’t control how her article was interpreted by the ordinary reader.

I wonder where Dugdale could have picked up that approach from?

The gaming ability of girls is clearly not likely to be the same as gay men, but it's a shorthand way of saying this is not tough enough for real men.

Why is the ability of girls to play a computer game not likely to be the same as the ability of gay males? That sounds a bit sexist. I don't think video games have much of a physical strength requirement?

Heavens, they'd never get away with making Little Britain these days.
#onlygayinthevillage. #imalaydee

Hmm interesting set of tweets.

It would be unusual to go to court without evidence of attempting to settle the matter first, otherwise you just get sent away to settle the matter.

It seems Dugdale has been rather bold with one of her statements:

twitter.com/DrMoragKerr/status/1110527851386859520

I don't know anything about the guy except what I’ve just read here and on Wiki but in the context of this thread, it will be interesting if any evidence is produced to show him being specifically non-misogynistic or a friend of women, as it has been to show him as non-homophobic and a friend to gay people. Although I know that's not the question this case is trying.

*much, not must

Sigh. Why are these things always obvious as I hit post and not before ...

Ten years ago, though! Imagine how must time some young paralegal or trainee solicitor has spent trawling through endless Google searches, Facebook, Twitter, below the line comments on media sites, you name it, to find incriminating comments. I often forget what I've posted within the next few moments. I don't know how I'd handle being confronted in court with throwaway remarks I'd made ten years ago about topics I'd since forgotten all about/changed my mind on.

As far as I know it wasn't a tweet but rather was a comment under a review of a video game. I wonder if anyone here has a link to the review or a screenshot of the comment.

When I was a child in the 60s the worst insult anyone could hurl at a boy was to label him a cissie. Men who were labelled effeminate were in big trouble. It's the same thinking that makes it impossible for a baby boy to be given a name that's usually given to girls, while a lot less risky for parents to give a baby girl a 'boy' name. In the eyes of the sexist neanderthals (of both sexes) who think gender roles are set in stone it's demeaning for a male to be lumped in with women - so much so that transwomen have to be cast out of the class of men and left for the women to sort out.

The gaming ability of girls is clearly not likely to be the same as gay men, but it's a shorthand way of saying this is not tough enough for real men.

As to what WoS might have meant by it, I have no idea, but Iggiepoppie has presumably dug out this ten-year-old tweet and looked at the context. I'm happy to accept her assurance that this was not meant to be taken literally.

That of course demonstrates the problem with Twitter. You have a few characters and it's terrifyingly easy to be taken out of context.

I wouldn't accept that someone making the (admittedly distasteful) comment about wishing someone had never been born as heterophobic if made in relation to a straight person so I'm struggling to see why it's suddenly homophobic simply because the subject of the tweet is gay.

I naively presumed he'd made that comment about the game because it contained a load of hunky blokes and he meant male homosexuals. If it was because the game was "easy" then it is offensive to homosexuals and girls, although girls statistically spend less time on video games than boys (they have better things to do!) where as I wouldn't have thought that video game playing ability was related to sexual orientation. I have no idea what the game is though and am only following the case on this thread, can't be bothered reading endless tweets. Not much sympathy for either of them at the moment.

You can either be insulted because
1) you're homosexual and think girls are 'lesser beings'. I.e. sexist
2) you're a girl and think homosexuals are 'lesser beings' i.e. homophobic

No, Neither of those things . It has nothing whatsoever to do with thinking less of either group.

I'm utterly puzzled why someone thinks the gaming ability of girls is the same as the ability of homosexuals of any age.

He was reviewing a game. He said the level of difficulty made it suitable for girls and homosexuals. Why would you lump girls and homosexuals in the same group in the context of their ability to play video games?

I'm not trying to be disengenuous here. The point of the remark was most likely both sexist and homophobic, but it doesn't need to be read or taken that way.

You can either be insulted because

1. you're homosexual and think girls are 'lesser beings'. I.e. sexist
2. you're a girl and think homosexuals are 'lesser beings' i.e. homophobic.

I don't know what I'm trying to say tbh. Perhaps we shouldn't take these things as insults and they will lose their power perhaps.

Sorry for the derail 😬

HorsewithnoWankhole yes, you're right of course. Either is cruel, but wish you were dead is worse, by some measure.

GabrielleNelson I think that's exactly why this case is important. It's a clash of either party's freedom of expression and the limits thereof. WoS expressed an opinion some found offensive but did not harm the person it was about other than being hurtful. KD expressed an opinion some found offensive and many agreed with but that could potentially be harmful to WoS. Is either party free to speak as they wish? If not, which one isn't? And why?

I generally agree that in a matchup between an elected politician and ex-leader of one of the main parties in a country (Scotland) vs niche but popular blogger, the power imbalance generally means the politician can do worse damage. But even if that is the case, is it ever justified for the politician to launch this kind of attack?

We all have our own ideas as to why KD did what she did, now it's up to the court.

Was the point not that the gaming industry views girls and homosexuals in a lesser light?

That was yesterday's discussion.

Does he kick puppies too?

Girls and homosexuals thing is from 2009, it's a joke against people who classify games that way, it's meta. Also, taking one tweet, out of context, is disingenuous.

For example, his dismissal of a video game as being pitched at “girls and homosexuals”

It's only homophobic if you think it's an insult to be bundled in with 'girls', which it isn't btw

He was reviewing a game. He said the level of difficulty made it suitable for girls and homosexuals. Why would you lump girls and homosexuals in the same group in the context of their ability to play video games?

RepealTheGRA ItsAllGoingToBeFine

YY

Rather taken aback at KD's argument here. If the definition of what constitutes offensive speech now lies entirely with the individual, we are in serious trouble.

Without publicly, legally or otherwise agreed definitions that are concrete, specific and most importantly clearly delineated, we cannot have free speech.

For example, his dismissal of a video game as being pitched at “girls and homosexuals”.

It's only homophobic if you think it's an insult to be bundled in with 'girls', which it isn't btw 🤔

Counsel should have asked the head of Stonewall to define homosexuality, not homophobia alone. After all, they no longer accept that homosexuals are exclusively same-sex attracted.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine

We’re back to words have to have an agreed meaning. Surely that’s a basic in a functioning society?