Blizzard institutes Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy in WoW?

Update: Blizzard has apologized! Nice to see them willing to rethink their policy and make amends.

According to Newsweekly, Blizzard Entertainment is banning explicitly queer-friendly guilds in its mega-popular World of Warcraft online multi-player gaming world:

Andrews' original posting read: "OZ [the name of her guild] is recruiting all levels � We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)" In her follow-up letter to the company, Andrews explained that there was an obvious misunderstanding and that she was not insulting anyone, but merely recruiting for a "GLBT friendly" guild.

The response from Blizzard was, "While we appreciate and understand your point of view, we do feel that the advertisement of a 'GLBT friendly' guild is very likely to result in harassment for players that may not have existed otherwise. If you will look at our policy, you will notice the suggested penalty for violating the Sexual Orientation Harassment Policy is to 'be temporarily suspended from the game.' However, as there was clearly no malicious intent on your part, this penalty was reduced to a warning."

So what, Blizzard now has a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy?

Gamer John Blatzheim, who heard of Andrews' situation, e-mailed Blizzard to express his concern of a double standard that game masters would send her a warning that she could not use "GLBT" as an advertisement to express a safe place for gay gamers after an incident a few months ago where a plague occurred within the game and players yelled in general chat, "Don't get the AIDS!"

"Many people are insulted just at the word 'homosexual' or any other word referring to sexual orientation," Blizzard responded to Blatzheim in an e-mail. "Also to discriminate against other players, such as not allowing any heterosexuals into the guild simply because of their sexual orientation, could cause extreme offense to a large percentage of our players and should be avoided."

Stonewall Champions and The Spreading Taint, two large gay guilds are currently formulating a letter they plan to submit to Blizzard requesting a more detailed explanation as to the intent of this reinterpretation and execution of the sexual harassment rule.

"We have determined that advertising sexual orientation is not appropriate for the high fantasy setting of the World of Warcraft and is therefore not permitted" was another of Blizzard's responses.

Sara Andrews has stated that she will not be renewing her World of Warcraft account due to Blizzards lack of support for a GLBT friendly environment, "It seems to be OK for general chat to be flooded with, 'That's so gay!' and 'I just got ganked! What a fag!' yet advertising for a GLBT friendly environment where we don't have to deal with such language is deemed inappropriate."

Just one more reason why you should be able to build your own server emulator and create your own rules for playing the game you want to play.

Comments

[Annalee]

I love the idea that having a queer-friendly guild will result in "more harrassment." Blizzard probably thinks this is a bad idea because it would mean they'd have to suspend more harrassers from the game.

Ultimately it sounds like Blizzard is violating its own sexual orientation policies, since they're harrassing people simply for being "queer friendly."

[A.R.Yngve]

Blizzard's first mistake was to raise the whole issue of "orientatation" inside the game world to begin with. That opened the can of worms which now cannot be shut. (I smell a lawsuit coming....)

Look: WoW IS NOT REAL. It's a simulacra, and a pretty rough one at that.

Can the simulated characters in WoW have sex with each other? How? Which kinds of sex? Have they got genitals to have sex with? How do you define "sex" in a world without genitals? How do you define "gender"?

See how absurd roleplayers get when they can't separate game from reality?

But the Pandora's Box has been opened, and WoW will be ruined by people with political axes to grind.

If this was an old-fashioned Dungeons & Dragons session, the killjoy who started grouching about discrimination would be tossed out. But it's a multimillion-dollar franchise, so that's not going to happen.

A brilliant display of social intelligence by all involved.

[Thud]

I've emailed Blizzard to ask if there are any *other* personal details players should not share for fear it'll cause more harrassment. I'd hate to get a TOS warning for letting people know I'm a liberal or a pagan for fear that might "offend" someone and "cause more harrassment." And my wife is concerned about revealing her gender, since there are certainly players there who think women have no place in the game.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Time an time again, I have reported people for using terms like "faggot" and "dyke". In the following days, those toons were still online playing, which means Blizard did nothing to chastise them.

If Blizzard were to ban all the openly hateful and the homophobic from its game, it would lose around 20% of its customers - especially those dreadful teenagers.

[illovich]

I just started playing again, this time on Hakkar, which is PVP server. I've been really blown away by the amount of casual homophobia in general chat. Not just overuse of the word "gay" as an ultimate negative, but tossing dis remarks at each other "%T likes boys," "ur so ghey," "faggot," a endless stream of jokes revealing a fear of sodomy as worst case scenario, etc. etc. etc.

At one point a few folks including myself were discussing the whole GLBT guild issue and someone asked what GLBT was...

When I told them, they had one word in response: "Disgusting"

In short, this weekend proved to me that there should be a place in WoW that is friendly to the GLBT community, and my heart goes out to them, because in their context WoW is probably the shittiest game I've ever played. Homophobia doesn't hit me that hard. To me it's just irritating, but I imagine to a member of the GLBT community it can get pretty depressing.

[Jeb Havens]

Blizzard’s official statement:

---
We encourage community building among our players with others of similar interests, and we understand that guilds are one of the primary ways to forge these communities. However, topics related to sensitive real-world subjects -- such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example -- have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment.

To promote a positive game environment for everyone and help prevent such harassment from taking place as best we can, we prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast. This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples.
---

So, the question is: Is this really a case of discrimination against a particular group? Or is it a fair, general policy to keep real-world hot-button issues out of the World of Warcraft universe?

I was thinking about this last night, and I realized why this is actually a case of discrimination against a particular group. If they want to ban mention of particular religions or political affiliations, I think it's kind of dumb but they can do what they want. No problem. The problem is when they say they want to similarly ban mention of sexual orientation, yet their game is already full of sexual orientation - mostly heterosexuality. So, by already allowing certain types of sexual orientation to show up in the game (heterosexual flirt phrases, gay jokes, dances, scantily clad women, weddings, etc.) and also saying “sexual orientation doesn't belong in a fantasy world", they are setting up a dangerous situation where only certain types of sexual orientation references would be punished - mostly homosexual. So, in saying they don't want references to politics, religion, and sexual orientation, that's just a veiled way of saying they don't want politics, religion, and non-funny homosexuality.

To make it a bit clearer, imagine if the WoW universe was almost entirely republican. If you type /hero your character says: "Warcraft starts with a W and I like it that way!" and holds up a little "W" hand sign. The WoW website and advertising features characters posing with Bush and giving the thumbs up, or riding those elephants. The website also has a section on the "Best Rallies", most of which are clearly republican. At least once a session, you hear people say things like "I hear one of your guild members is a DEM! EWWW! Har Har" or "This loot sucks worse than Kerry!"

Now, imagine you want to form a guild where you wouldn't have to deal with all that, and advertised for a Democrat-friendly guild. You get a response from Blizzard saying you've violated their harassment policy and next time you do it you'll be kicked off. They say that politics has no place in a fantasy world such as WoW. Other players tell you to quit whining, and that no one in the game cares about your political affiliation, so there's no reason to bring it up. Tell people you're a dem in private if you want, but lots of players are offended by the term.

Now, which does that sound like: discrimination against a specific group, or is it just about keeping real-world politics out of a role-playing environment?

- Jeb

--
----
------
--------
Jeb Havens
Lead Designer

[Autumn]

When I did a check on , I noted that the website was registered as follows:

Blizzard Entertainment
PO BOX 18979
IRVINE CA 92623-8979
US
949-955-1380 fax: 949-737-2000
Technical Contact:
Luff aluff@BLIZZARD.COM

That means, I believe, that the company that owns Warcraft is doing at least some of its business from California.

My question on Blizzard's policy is regarding the changes that California's AB 1400 brought to the Unruh Act on 1/1/2006. Wouldn't the changes that specifically added sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and marital status to the list of protected classes for the Unruh Act have made Blizzard's policy a possibly illegal business practice for a business based in California?

Here's a link to an article on the changes to the Unruh Act that explains the changes in "English" (). From the last paragraph of the article, this is what Assemblyman Jeffery Kors was quoted as saying about the Unruh Act/AB 1400:

We've heard of many instances where lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people have been denied rooms at hotels and motels, for instance, and this bans any business open to the public from discrimination. It's one step in our long-term goal of ending discrimination in every single California code, which we're doing systematically – in labor and employment, in public accommodation, and this year we're tackling housing. Our goal is to go through the codes and clean them all up and make sure no one is discriminated against. And in many of these bills it's not just our issues we're addressing; we're going through to make sure every group in all categories is protected.

Also, here's an explanation of the Unruh Act, and its changes from an Equality California press release ():

The Unruh Act applies to all business establishments that provide services, goods or accommodations to the public. Businesses subject to the Unruh Act include, but are not limited to, shopping centers, mobile home parks, bars and restaurants, schools, medical and dental offices, hotels and motels, and condominium homeowners associations. The Unruh Act explicitly prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability or medical condition. Courts have held that the categories listed in the law are merely examples and that the Unruh Act should be interpreted broadly to prohibit arbitrary discrimination including discrimination based on personal characteristics, geographical origin, physical attributes and individual beliefs.

Since Blizzard is based in Irvine, California, it would appear the Unruh Act applies to their business. And with that in mind, to me this sounds like Blizzard's policy borders on illegal -- if Blizzard really believes that discussion of sexual orientation "is not appropriate for the high fantasy setting of the World of Warcraft," (as stated in an email sent to Sara Andrews) then why does the company endorse heterosexual weddings? In an officially sponsored "Group Screenshot Contest," Blizzard chose this photo of a male and female character getting married in a chapel. By endorsing the heterosexual relationships but explicitly forbidding the mere discussion of homosexual topics indicates to me that the Unruh Act's prohibitions against discrimination based on "sexual orientation" and "marital status" may have occured.

[Autumn]

Links Corrected.
-----

When I did a http://www.samspade.org/t/ check on http://Blizzard.com, I noted that the website was registered as follows:

Blizzard Entertainment
PO BOX 18979
IRVINE CA 92623-8979
US
949-955-1380 fax: 949-737-2000
Technical Contact:
Luff aluff@BLIZZARD.COM

That means, I believe, that the company that owns Warcraft is doing at least some of its business from California.

My question on Blizzard's policy is regarding the changes that California's AB 1400 brought to the Unruh Act on 1/1/2006. Wouldn't the changes that specifically added sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and marital status to the list of protected classes for the Unruh Act have made Blizzard's policy a possibly illegal business practice for a business based in California?

Here's a link to an article on the changes to the Unruh Act that explains the changes in "English" (http://tinyurl.com/bmsbj). From the last paragraph of the article, this is what Assemblyman Jeffery Kors was quoted as saying about the Unruh Act/AB 1400:

We've heard of many instances where lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people have been denied rooms at hotels and motels, for instance, and this bans any business open to the public from discrimination. It's one step in our long-term goal of ending discrimination in every single California code, which we're doing systematically – in labor and employment, in public accommodation, and this year we're tackling housing. Our goal is to go through the codes and clean them all up and make sure no one is discriminated against. And in many of these bills it's not just our issues we're addressing; we're going through to make sure every group in all categories is protected.

Also, here's an explanation of the Unruh Act, and its changes from an Equality California press release (http://tinyurl.com/cogpe):

The Unruh Act applies to all business establishments that provide services, goods or accommodations to the public. Businesses subject to the Unruh Act include, but are not limited to, shopping centers, mobile home parks, bars and restaurants, schools, medical and dental offices, hotels and motels, and condominium homeowners associations. The Unruh Act explicitly prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability or medical condition. Courts have held that the categories listed in the law are merely examples and that the Unruh Act should be interpreted broadly to prohibit arbitrary discrimination including discrimination based on personal characteristics, geographical origin, physical attributes and individual beliefs.

Since Blizzard is based in Irvine, California, it would appear the Unruh Act applies to their business. And with that in mind, to me this sounds like Blizzard's policy borders on illegal -- if Blizzard really believes that discussion of sexual orientation "is not appropriate for the high fantasy setting of the World of Warcraft," (as stated in an email sent to Sara Andrews) then why does the company endorse heterosexual weddings? In an officially sponsored "Group Screenshot Contest," Blizzard chose this photo of a male and female character getting married in a chapel. By endorsing the heterosexual relationships but explicitly forbidding the mere discussion of homosexual topics indicates to me that the Unruh Act's prohibitions against discrimination based on "sexual orientation" and "marital status" may have occured.

[Pagan Dyke]

I haven't gamed online for awhile now (having just switched back to DSL), so I may be wrong in this. But from what I remember, you do have certain privileges (when creating games, anyway) which include booting offensive players out of it. I'd assume as a guild moderator, you'd have the same options.

As a self-identified Dyke, I run into my own share of discrimination which I handle as I see fit. lizzard's defense - telling us that they've got our best interests at heart is not only bullsh*t, but patronizing and downright offensive. Blizzard's other response of not wanting to offend the heterosexual majority by having them excluded from the guild just proves that they haven't actually read her post which clearly states it's not a "GLBT only" space.

When I did game online, Blizzard was one of the places I avoided - mostly because of the very homophobia, racism, etc. that existed (and apparently still exists). And today, from what I've read from other gamers, Blizzard is still turning a blind eye to it. Except to tell us that we haven't the right to our own safe space. They honestly must think we're idiots not to realize the consequences of 'outing' ourselves in the gaming world and that we're perfectly capable of dealing with that ourselves, the way we always have. The same goes for people of colour, those who are disabled, etc. etc. It's not like this is our first time out.

If this behaviour is so unacceptable, then why haven't they been banning the bigoted players?

The entire thing is ridiculous. I'd love to play with other queer players, and when I gamed on Heat my tag was "Diablo Dyke". No one ever complained, and I never had a lack of gaming companions, gay or straight. Blizzard seems to think that we're unaware of the homophobia rampant in the gaming world and that we're unable to take care of ourselves.

That's pretty much my opinion. I'd keep writing, but I'm pretty disgusted at this point. The whole thing is a charade.

Peace, Pagan Dyke.

[nynetguy]

Folks, this is not a matter of free speech no matter how much the folks at GLAD would like to spin it.

A private company is not required to uphold the first amendment. I cannot start proseletyzing in the office any more than I can start passing around nazi propoganda materials. Blizzard has the right to set forth any rules and regulations as they wish so long as they do not violate the laws of the land and if Blizzard wants to say you cannot discuss sexual orientation then guess what folks, you can't discuss it.

I side with Blizzard here. I'm a WoW player and I, along with every other player, agreed to abide by the EULA. It's a private company that is providing us, the users, a service which we pay them for.

If you don't like it then don' play but please do not try to argue that there was some sort of violation of rights.

The Constitution, in this regard, does not apply. Hell, Blizzard could openly have the policy that they do not want homosexuals, blacks or any other ethnic group play their game and they would not be in violation of any legal law.

[Jo]

Whoopdeedoo they put up a picture of a male and female. if they put up a picture of a male and a male theyd lose business and the straight easily offended people would whine. Also, if you, 'diablo dyke' care so much about people on wow making fun of you dont broadcast your damn sexuality. People dont care if youre gay or not, and you can be proud, but people dont want to know. Both stop whining and play the damn game.

[Like to luv mature]

Looks to me to be a non issue. WoW is a fantasy world full of fantasy things I know I don't play to find other people to play with that like mature lovers. Sexual preference whatever it may be really doesn't have a place in an online fantasy game. Plain and simple play with others if you like the way they play keep playing with them.