Arguably, there are two major reasons for being a homophobe. One is the religious factor. The other is the ick factor. The ick factor tend to correllate rather strongly with immaturity. And as a gamer, as much as I hate to admit it, there’s a whole hell of a lot of immaturity in the roleplaying demographic.
Heh. I sometimes go to Second Life - a virtual reality environment that has infinitely customizable avatars. There are even a lot of furries and other non-humans there. Yet if I give my obviously female character short hair, I inevitably get strangers coming up to me and saying “OMG, do you know you have men’s hair! Why do you have men’s hair?” :rolleyes:
“Well, I saw it, liked it, scalped him and kept it.”
So it was Bantown. Hm.
I don’t think anyone was really pissed over the prospect of Amazon being some kind of stealth conservative organization enacting their anti-gay views. Well, maybe a few people at first. But after the initial moments, I think most of the outrage was over the weakness of a system that allows something as important as page rank to be so easily manipulated.
It’s also debatable whether the outrage was anything more than “mild”. Off the cuff internet postings in response to dismaying developments tend to be given to hyperbole. I don’t think there were ever any pitchforks. Maybe just under-the-breath mumblings and glances towards the toolshed as everyone waited for more detailed response from Amazon.
I’m horrified at the thought that you think that it’s better to be chainsawed to death than live in a world where an online retailer makes a marketing decision that you don’t like relating to a niche market.
Wonder what his explanation is for lesbianism.
Uh…whoosh?
He’s totally off, anyway. We’re bitterly ashamed of it, that’s why we’re always looking for some place to hide it.
Yes, without a doubt you were.
Uh, I kind of doubt that since he was pointing out that his post was full of hyperbole?
Regardless of who caused this or what Amazon was intending, I’m betting this is going to be a significant PR disaster for them. It’s spreading well beyond the LGBT-friendly blogosphere; the LA Times book blog noticed the complaints Sunday and got the “it’s a glitch” response the same day. Publisher’s Weekly and Wired have also commented. There will doubtless be more coverage as the various assorted media outlets wake up to the workweek. I’m thinking Amazon should order up a heaping platter of stewed crow at their earliest convenience.
Edit: Ooo, Google News has a whole lotta bad press for Amazon…
There was absolutely nothing in the post I was referring to that even hinted of hype or humor. Nor was there in his follow up which called me a bigot because I didn’t find the Amazon situation worse than being tortured and killed by a chainsaw. However, since both were so ridiculous, and since like I said LHoD isn’t normally given to such histrionics, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt (albeit with a residual amount of skepticism). Still, it’s far from obvious that he was using either hyperbole or humor in either of those two posts.
It was pretty obvious to some of us.
That guy is probably lying through his teeth. I do think he’s got a point, though.
Okay. I’m more or less coming around to the hypothesis that it’s not some sort of massive effort on Amazon’s part to de-list queer books on purpose for that reason.
The hypothesis that some non-publicized feature of its system for dealing with complaints being exploited to nefarious ends does seem plausible.
The following things then continue reflect poorly on Amazon in this case:
-
The system in the first place. The first possibility - that there’s a human agency that reviews complaints and takes action - means that someone would have been approving all of these, and that’s reprehensible and to my mind only marginally less culpable than the idea they were doing this on purpose. The second possibility - that there is an automatic system - is too stupid for words. They couldn’t have foreseen that it would be exploited like this?
-
The method of adult screening. Doing it like this is gross. Implement a safe search policy if you like - like Google does - but make it optional, first of all; it’s really intolerable to take ‘adult’ items out of everybody’s search results, whether they’d like to see them or not, and leaves 1) above that much more open to abuse. And make it opt-in, not opt-out, again like Google.
-
Public relations. Yes, I know it’s Easter weekend, but you saw how fast this thing moved. The thing to learn is that for an Internet company the size of Amazon, PR is 24-7-365. Especially since something like this would naturally tend to occur on a holiday weekend precisely to wreak havoc.
I don’t accept that it was stupid for the queer community to have leapt on this: a huge chunk of our literature disappearing off the face of their search engine is a big deal, and it also (between making queers invisible, and classifying queer lives and experiences as ‘adult’) has major resonances with unambiguous acts of assholism that happen all the time.
If Amazon had gotten it together to make some kind of reasonable announcement - and by “reasonable” I mean actually addressing the issue, not dismissing it as a minor “glitch” when everyone could see it wasn’t - much of this could have been averted.
For that matter, it’s 3:45 ET and I’m still waiting for something to the effect of what tumbleddown suggested. Not to mention a big apology to their queer customers; even if it wasn’t intentional on their part, their system was used in a homophobic way and they need to acknowledge that they get that, and clarify that they understand that queer literature is not ‘adult’ or ‘erotic’ or ‘sexually themed’ by virtue of being queer and should not be restricted for such reasons, and will not be when/if they implement a more competent safe search system.
The first one wasn’t obvious to me because I do find it pretty horrifying myself, but the second part where he pointed out that he’d rather be slaughtered than live in a world where no one understood hyperbole/humor made it pretty crystal clear. At this point, I think it’s obvious it’s a joke. If it’s not, then I’m going to go get my sacrometer recalibrated.
ETA: Ah, misread your last post. If it’s not intentional, then that’s one thing. Still, I feel creeped out.
It may also point to a deeper problem. This was pointed out on a mailing list I’m on.
I’m perfectly willing to accept that this is a simple screw-up. I will not be happy if they don’t fix it.
I think it’s sad that some homosexuals have so little worth to their lives outside of their sexuality that they spend all their time waiting to be uber-offended over every little thing.
QFT. I host/moderate a kinky book club, we frequently read GLBT books and erotica, and I use Amazon as one way of finding books that are suitable for us. How the fuck am I supposed to find adult books for us to read if they remove them from their search results? And if they carry a book, shouldn’t they be trying to sell it, not hide it? It’s hard enough to find decent queer/trans erotica as it is.
In regards the rather odd selection of books that were affected, the Dear Author blog took a look at the metadata tags of a sample of affected books and comes up with a theory:
Note that 1) it seems to track with publisher/Amazon categorizations, NOT user-submitted tags, and 2) the first three have nothing to do with explicitness of content.
I’m straight, and I’m uber-offended about this. And also by your comment. Therefore, please feel free to [suggestion censored because in violation of pit rules].