Called it they permabanned Vincent for not bending over backwards and embracing their toxic, enablist, SJW, circle jerk group echo chamber hive.
I consider it a badge of honor. I'm all about open discourse, but in order to engage in it you have to have some thick skin and a spine. These are difficult issues we're addressing and intolerance from one side is just as bad as intolerance from the other. I'm happy for Jonathan Van Ness to turn the fabulous dial up to thirteen at my table, but by the same token if someone at my table ticked a box that said that made them uncomfortable, I dont think its unfair for them to say so. How the table handles that is up to that table in particular. Not up to TBP.
I'm a cis white hetero male. And yet I come down on the LGBT side when it comes to things like the cake shop in colorado where i'm from. I come down on the LGBT side when it comes to Kim Davis. But theres a line you're crossing when you say the other side cant even honestly talk about how they feel anymore even if you disagree with it. Its gonna be tough as hell and uncomfortable as hell and painful as hell... But talking with them (folks uncomfortable with open LGBT community) about their uncomfortable feelings is how we get through it. Talking about it is how we solve it. Talking about it is how we heal it.
They can control the content of their forum and they're right, if they're controlling open discourse on their forums then theyr'e correct i'm not a good fit for that. I have a brain and an open heart. And thick skin. And a spine. And most importantly a desire to get the actual issue at hand solved. I dont post in forums much. But I bothered to post in these because its big. Its important.
TPB wants them to overcome their bias, but they cant even see their own. They know how bad a closet feels and yet they shut me into one pretty much immediately. And they did it the second I used the word closet to put a sharp point on pointing out their hypocrisy so they'd see it for what it was. I know it stung. It was supposed to. #triggered. I started out soft. I tried to be nice. They do a worse job of addressing the issue than the book the thread is talking about and they need to understand that.
Out here in the real world LGBT issues need to stop being seen as squick, but what this BOOK is trying to address is that everyone truly does have something that makes them uncomfortable that they dont want to experience at the table and we're supposed to use this book to address those things. But according to TBP that issue is off limits even in this context. Even in the context that gore and eyeballs are. It might offend you that someone thinks 'shaggin the barmaid' is 'squicky at the table' and please fade to black. Eyeballs and tentacles are ok but gore is not is a 'level' of squick. LGBT issues in the real world are closer to the sex column in squickiness than they are to the rape column sure... But at the game table, for some people, hate it though you might, there are still people out there that would shag the barmaid but dont want to experience your male barbarian to shag the burly bartender at the table. Now thats an important conversation to have. Specifically for the LGBT community if they're interested in increasing tolerance out here in the real world this is a great place to start those conversations and this book COULD have been a tool in that engine. But it conspicuously does not, and saying so seems to set their teeth on edge.
Don't believe it should be talked about? Dont think it comes up? Check out the 'gamers' trilogy. Bard that sleeps with every girl he finds? A few people find it squicky. Wizard plays female caster for a change, a few more people find it squicky. Wizard female caster starts hitting on female fighter and you guessed it. Female fighter finds it squicky. But its not ok for us to talk about it? The gaming table is supposed to be a great place to start those conversations. The book could have had some very valuable instructions for adressing those conversations in a way that would be constructive. But the book didnt seem to have it. And TBP doesnt seem to want it. Thats conspicuous to me. And I get banned for suggesting it might ought to be there.
All i'm saying is there are people out there who are uncomfortable and the only way you're going to make them more comfortable is with open dialogue. TBP isnt interested in open dialogue so they're not interested in solving the problem. They are the problem. Nothing makes "the uncomfortable right" more uncomfortable than not being able to work through these issues honestly in the open and thats a hard road for everyone. But its the better road.
And I was happy to show up for that tough conversation for as long as it was a real one.
Its actually a good thing that they ban folks from these kind of conversations because if we're being honest, they're not ready to have these kinds of conversations. They'll get there eventually. Its a journey. The first hump you have to get over on that journey is yourself. Particularly if your goal is for the other side to get over themselves. You dont let a 7 year old see a pg movie and you dont let a 13 year old see an nc17 movie. You dont let TBP have an adult conversation because they still need guidance and it shows. They will get there. Eventually. Just a matter of time. Right now the biggest problem is they think *they* are parental guidance when really they're the tempestuous hormonal preteen.