Obsidian Removes “Transmisogynistic” Poem From Pillars of Eternity

CraveOnline: "Pillars of Eternity took everyone by surprise when it released from out of nowhere to widespread critical acclaim, though its success was unfortunately blighted by a limerick included in the game that was written by one of its Kickstarter backers. Following much debate over whether the developer should leave the poem in the game, Obsidian has now removed it."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
johndoe112111751d ago

Pretty soon everyone in this world will completely stop talking to each other for fear of offending someone every time you open your mouth.

NecotheSergal1751d ago

Your comment offends me, you're insinuating I'd be offended easily by people like you just for saying anything! Oh Em Gee I'm enraged that you're generalizing people like me! I'm going to complain to all my friends about this!

johndoe112111750d ago

And I'm extremely offended at you being offended. Unlike me you do not have the right to say and think as you see fit. Who gave you the right to respond to me and question my opinion? I'm gonna go get all my friends to send strongly worded emails to you demanding that you retract your post. We may just also send an email to your employer and demand you be terminated. And if all that fails, I have friends in MSNBC, ABC, LMNOP and WXYZ news that will interview me and allow me to tell the whole world how much of a meanie you are.

NecotheSergal1750d ago

[Comment Removed by HAVAmedia]

Bansai1750d ago


Obsidian you f*****g cowards.

Anthotis1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )

The poem had nothing to do with people suffering from gender identity disorder in the first place, not that that would be a problem anyway.

The creature that started this campaign often uses the twitter hashtag #killallmen. Which is something that does warrant genuine concern.

Find @icequeenerika and see for yourself.

Tiqila1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )

oh man, these are strange times...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1750d ago
JsonHenry1750d ago

I guess I'm the only one that thought it was funny?

It saddens me that the author could even claim that this game was "blighted" in any way by this poem. Perpetually offended people will always find something to be offended by. Check metacritic. No one cares but a very, very, slight vocal minority.

johndoe112111750d ago

I'm seriously offended at the fact that you were saddened. I'm also offended that you have a problem with offended people who always get offended. You sir, are an offence to offensiveness.

JsonHenry1750d ago

They're gonna put me on trial at the Hague one day I am sure.

Activemessiah1751d ago

I had no idea such word existed... O_o

johndoe112111751d ago

Yep, it's right up there with phrases like "polygon journalist","Happy SJW" and "creative freedom".

DragonKnight1751d ago

It f***ing doesn't. Idiots are inventing words for other idiots to use and try to add into the lexicon.

Spotie1750d ago

That's how the language grows.

Unfortunately, much of what's being added these days is complete and utter crap.

DragonKnight1750d ago

Yeah I know how language grows, problem is that "transmisogynistic" is an impossible term. One can't be transmisogynistic.

Spotie1750d ago

Maybe it's like transatlantic? The poem just crosses the path of transgender people?

rainslacker1750d ago

There is already a word for this. It's called transphobia.

This is how language grows Spotie. The term phobia is referencing the fear of something. however, in the case of transphobia, or homophobia, etc, the phobia is being extended to be inclusive of harassment and discrimination.

Making up new words by taking two words which are logically not even possible to have together and allow both to keep their meaning is just bad grammar.

In this case, if the term was transogynistic, then at least it would have some merit, although it just seems like a made up word. Most of these kinds of made up words take years before they'll be officially added to a language, until then, they're considered colloquialisms, and disregarded for any sort of scholarly use outside of quoting the term for reference. Keep in mind that 99.9% of these words never make it into the official language, and eventually die out.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1750d ago
-Foxtrot1751d ago

WHAT? Are they serious.

There is nothing wrong with that poem, it's just a take on those drunken stories you hear about men getting with someone at bars, going home drunk (or not) and finding out the next day the woman is or was a man.

Hell Stu from Hangover 2 is a perfect example of this.

They weren't trying to be hateful. Good lord.

Censorship is starting to get out control.

rdgneoz31751d ago

Or the classic song Lola by the Kinks from the 70s.

And yah, today's world is pretty sad. Censoring pretty much everything, so that nobody gets the least bit offended. And when people do get offended, they go on TV or sue...

tanukisuit1751d ago (Edited 1751d ago )

Here's the thing. From what I've read over at IGN,
the transgender person that brought the issue to Obsidian, also has various tweets with the hashtag "killallmen" or something like that - just as equally appalling.

kraenk121750d ago

The problem isn't just censorship, it is self-censorship out of false political correctness. One day all character will be gone and we will all be made the same. How incredibly boring.

Ashlen1751d ago

I agree with the decision.

I fully support freedom of speech, but that was inappropriate for a commercial release. I think they had every right to leave it in, but it was the right decision to remove it.

DragonKnight1751d ago

No it wasn't. What is or is not appropriate is up to individual determination. Finding that poem is something that CAN happen but only if you go looking for it. You can't say that you support both free speech and the idea that the expression of said speech should be removed.

ZiggyStarnuts1750d ago

Of course you can. You can support free speech, but also acknowledge that words carry weight and that they can upset people. Having the right to free speech doesn't mean that you have the right to say whatever you like without any repercussions or consequences.

The backer exercised his right to free speech by writing the limerick, and others exercised theirs by pointing out that it could be upsetting for trans people. It works both ways.

DragonKnight1750d ago

Saying that it might be upsetting is not the same as saying it needs to be removed. One is saying "hey look, some people won't like this" the other is saying "we don't like this and we matter more than you so get rid of it."

Again, if you're for freedom of speech, you're for how that speech is expressed. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. You don't get to make it conditional. Consequences arise from every action taken, doesn't mean you have the right to halt freedoms.

Ashlen1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )

Well, actually as proved by what happened "What is or is not appropriate" is decided by the games manufacturer, not the individual.

And someone might argue that if your a player who likes to read all the flavor text in a game it's not something that "CAN" happen but WILL happen.

Also a person can respect freedom of speech but have the common sense to for example not walk up to people and just call them derogatory names.

I'm sure the hosts of this site respect freedom of speech yet there are still rules to what is or isn't appropriate.

DragonKnight1750d ago

"Well, actually as proved by what happened "What is or is not appropriate" is decided by the games manufacturer, not the individual."

Two things. First, the "games manufacturer" was bombarded with hate because of this. They were pressured into a decision, they didn't come to it organically. Second, in this case "games manufacturer" is the individual. There's precedent for corporations to be labelled as "people" within the law.

"And someone might argue that if your a player who likes to read all the flavor text in a game it's not something that "CAN" happen but WILL happen unless a person tries to avoid it."

And that would be a poor argument to make as it relies on assumption and possibility whereas my argument is a fact. You have to look for the text to see it, it's not exactly on your direct path.

"Also a person can respect freedom of speech but have the common sense to for example not walk up to people and just call them derogatory names."

Which is completely different from saying that the right to express that freedom should be removed because some people won't like it.

"I'm sure the hosts of this site respect freedom of speech yet there are still rules to what is or isn't appropriate."

No there aren't. What is or is not appropriate is subjective. You can't make a rule that says that something is appropriate without making it a rule that it's only appropriate because you think it is and others agree with you. There are others who don't, which is fine, but you can't tell them that what you say is right and what they say is wrong, that's not how it works. Who died and made you absolute ruler? Why does your opinion of what is appropriate count and someone else's doesn't?

The answer is that people whined. Enough that other people didn't want to hear it anymore and did what it took to shut them up. Happens every day.

Ashlen1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )


The manufacturer made the decision not anyone else. That is a fact.

Anything else was outside influence only. They could have also chose to leave it. It was their choice and only theirs.

And don't go spouting legal terminology like that it's just silly given the context.

It's not an assumption that people want to, and do read all the flavor text in a game.

I encourage you to prove how right you are about this site. To prove it all you have to do is keep swearing and calling people derogatory things.

The bad language and personal attack and report features are just there for show, right? I mean they've never banned anyone from the site before, right? So you've got no reason not to prove how right you are, right?

DragonKnight1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )

Ashlen, you're arguing like a child. You're taking the "I'm right, you're wrong, I'm going to sing the I was right song" approach and it's embarrassing.

PR influences companies. A company will fold to public pressure because they care about the bottom line. This means they'll do things they normally wouldn't to spare themselves from losing money. Yes, the company made the decision. Why they did is what's important. Clearly they had no problem putting the poem in the game in the first place, which is a decision they made and could have changed well before the poem was ever publicly seen. The reason the poem is not there now is because of public pressure forcing a decision. That's an easily observed fact.

The legal terminology applies, whether you want to accept it or not. The company is the individual, it has precedence and you can't simply throw out that precedent because you wish my statement was wrong.

It's an assumption that the number of people who go over everything with a fine toothed comb is significant. You brought this argument up to try and make a case that eventually some person would find the poem and be offended. That's a pointless argument. Life is offensive. There are 7 billion people in the world and people get offended by everything. Just because 1 person among the billions COULD find it and be offended, doesn't mean it's inappropriate.

This site is a privately owned space that grants public access, much like a store. Because of this, the owners have the right to create certain rules of conduct that, if not followed, allow them to block access to the site. It's nowhere near the same as a society that has Free Speech laws. This site flat out tells you that you don't have freedom of speech here. You have the privilege of accessing and commenting on the site, but it comes with restrictions. In society, actions are restricted, not speech. I can call you any name I want to out on the street and not be arrested for doing so, I can't punch you in the face and call that expression. Learn the difference.

The only people banned from this site were banned due to a form of perjury or because they were spam bots, not because they said a bad word.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1750d ago
KryptoniteTail1751d ago

You do not fully support freedom of speech. You fully defend freedom of speech you deem comfortable and agreeable. How do I know this? You think it was both inappropriate for a commercial release and that it should be removed. That's f****** censorship you sheep.

Ashlen1750d ago (Edited 1750d ago )

You sir, don't understand the difference between freedom of speech and good taste and judgement.

Just as an example on this site you can report people for using bad language.

It's the reason why even though Mc Donalds could name a burger the "greedy jew burger" or the "cotton pickin chicken sandwich" they never would.

It would be bad for there image they do it as a choice, not because it's a law.

marison1750d ago

Great to see someone agreeing.

Transgender people are murdered a lot in the world.

Any text that contribute with that, causing prejudice, should be avoided.

Please, check this:

Do you think there's nothing wrong with a person be murdered only for be himself/herself?

FriedGoat1750d ago

Nobody is disputing that murder of transgender people is wrong.
But there is nothing wrong with the poem either.
If a poem about a trangender going to bed with the sex of his/her choice only to find that it was the opposite, would it offend anyone? no.
and that is the reason this censorship is stupid as hell.

Spotie1750d ago

"freedom of speech and good taste and judgement."

There is no correlation, positive or negative, between these two things. You are free to speak your mind, even if what you say is in poor taste or lacks proper judgment.

Granted, there are consequences, but you're free to say whatever the hell you want.

That said, this is yet another case of things getting out of control for the sake of the thin skinned. I imagine there's at least one person on this site who would- and has before- label me as the "straight white male" that supposedly fills gaming and is afraid of women and all the rest of this stuff... but I'm a straight black male with gay friends who stands up for the ACTUAL mistreatment of women, minorities, the bullied, etc.

I'm a little tired of this crap. I spent most of my childhood bullied and clinically depressed, and escaped that only to find hidden- and not so hidden- racism because my gender and skin color paint a target on my back. Why am I not going off the deep end about every little thing? Hell, even when I had a persecution complex, I STILL didn't see insult as frequently as people do today, and that was only a decade ago.

What's changed so much?

It was the wrong decision to remove the poem. At best, they should have made a statement regarding the intent of the poem and left it at that. Bending to the will of people who are running around just spoiling for a fight is NEVER the right thing to do.

Ashlen1750d ago

Your not as free to say whatever you want as you might think.

You might want to read up on things like slander harassment and liable as well as other laws related to speech and print.

What was the intent of the poem? Remember it wasn't written by Obsidian but by a non-employee donor.

Even if it was humor do you not think the person who wrote it knew it would be controversial or even offensive?

This isn't even an issue of freedom of speech, it was a business decision.

If a donor had written "christians are all stupid" do you think they would/should have left it in? Regardless of the legality of it all.

rainslacker1750d ago

"Hell, even when I had a persecution complex, I STILL didn't see insult as frequently as people do today, and that was only a decade ago."

It was in 2001 that the internet finally became mainstream and usage skyrocketd. It was about 3 years later where everyone realized they could use the internet to voice their opinion. Coincidentally, it was also about a decade ago where sensationalist media pretty much overtook the traditional press, and now, everyone who had a complaint expected immediate remedy.

Give or take a year or two of course.

It's kind of scary that this can happen in just over a decade(or so). Id say people are becoming stupider because of the internet, or possibly less tolerant...ironically. However the truth is is that people have always been like that, we just never really heard about it, so it seems like a bigger problem now than it ever has been...despite the fact that it's probably actually better in many regards now due to the vast expression of ideas and easy access to information. Now if that information could stop being taken blindly with no critical thought by some things would actually seem to get better.

Spotie1750d ago

The word is "libel."

I'm fully aware of these things. I even said "Granted, there are consequences."

Free speech means being responsible with the words you say. Or rather, that BECAUSE you have free speech, you are personally responsible for what you say. With the exception of sensitive situations either in a court of law, or dealing with national secrets, you are generally free to say what you wish, and you cannot legally be stopped from saying it. You can, however, be legally held responsible for what you decide to say.

Having a brain doesn't ensure that people aren't stupid. Similarly, having free speech doesn't ensure that it won't be abused.

All that aside, the point remains that you have to actively search for the insult here, something that's become far too frequent.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1750d ago
SaveFerris1751d ago

This story is old. It wasn't removed by Obsidian, the backer was asked if they wanted to change it.

Anthotis1750d ago

Obsidious claimed that it failed their vetting process after the twitter rage.

That means it was gonna be censored one way or the other.

SaveFerris1750d ago

I agree that it does look that way.

IMO, it looks like Obsidian either missed this submission from the backer or decided not to vet it initially until this thing blew up. The funny thing is, the name of the backer is misspelt in the original limerick.

Show all comments (62)
The story is too old to be commented.