Bad name for shop

[RealAmerican1776]

Oh, I didn't know what it stood for 

[KneeOn]

We too have two ratings - PEGI being the one for games as mentioned.
We also have BFFC film ratings going from Uc (especially suitable for young children) U - everyone, PG - parental guidance, 12a - suitable for children 12 and up with a parents consent, 12, 15 and 18 - suitable for their respective ages up.

It's an offence to sell a game or film to someone younger than its rating or allow someone to play that in an official environment like a cinema or games room.

PEGI 12: Video games that show violence of a slightly more graphic nature towards fantasy characters or non-realistic violence towards human-like characters would fall in this age category. Sexual innuendo or sexual posturing can be present, while any bad language in this category must be mild. Gambling as it is normally carried out in real life in casinos or gambling halls can also be present (e.g. card games that in real life would be played for money) from https://pegi.info/what-do-the-labels-mean

Innuendo is directly relevant but unless someone wanted to do a specifically graphic statue, I don't think posturing is relevant. I do think innuendo covers this. Gambling, for a casino attraction, I also think is relevant.

It's an interesting discussion around what is and isn't suitable for the game. I agree with Issac, this is valuable. There are at least three new paks being created plus the constant evolution of well established paks that have a large third party content library. Another thread was discussing how to get more content in game and encourage new painters. An ever lowering age of players on other games will hopefully translate in to people playing Simutrans and we have a clearer understanding of what content will and won't be accepted in anything 'official' or supplied via the 'official' channels.

[RealAmerican1776]

Here in the U.S. casino's for the most part are illegal EXCEPT on Indian Reservations and a few states like here in Nevada and you have to be older then 21 because they sell alcohol. Many of the casino's in Nevada do have restaurants so it is alright to take your kids to these but they can't gamble or play on any of the slot machines.

[Leartin]

@Leartin for what its worth, Furries [...] are closely associated to sexual content. I do not agree that by linking Furries to Sex, you are also linking or the type of person to link LGBT+ communities to AIDS, Islam to terrorism or Germany to Nazism. I think that weakens the arguments you've made.
It is a popular cultural phenomenon bred by memes shared across friendly local meme suppliers that Furries are sexually deviant or sexually motivated in their pursuit of the hobby.

I think there's a misunderstanding. I'm not saying if you link Furries to Sex, you are also linking LGBT+ to Aids, neither is my claim that nobody links Furries to Sex, it's all too common.
What I'm saying is that Furries are people, and linking them to Sex, viewing them, as a group, as something that needs to be hidden, is a form of prejudice against those people. It's prejudice, because it's simply not true.
What I did is show other forms of prejudice which people are typically aware to exist(ed), but (I hope) they don't practice on this forum. People usually understand that it's not just factually wrong to link muslims to terrorism or German to Nazism, but that it defames a whole lot of innocent people. I'm trying to make them understand that it's no different for Furries - if you think of them as something obscene, you are doing an injustice to a lot of people.



Imagine this: Someone spreads a rumor about a good friend of yours. Most people believe it, but you know it's false. Since it's a really bad rumor, others start to shun your friend - nobody want's to hang out with him anymore.
You are going to throw a party soon. Will you:
A) Invite your friend, because you know he did nothing wrong; if someone objects, you'll explain the rumor is a lie, and if they don't believe you, you don't care for them?
B) Don't invite your friend, since even though he is completely innocent, others won't think so, and it's just easier to not have him there.

I'm convinced the matter at hand is pretty much the same question. By excluding Furries because someone might think the word is lewd even though it isn't, you are effectively giving in to a rumor and punish someone who didn't do anything wrong, in order to be able to hang out with those who continue to wrong them, none the wiser.

Another good example of content management is the fact no pak will officially ship with nuclear or wartime industry. It is possible to create one if you have the skill and ability to create a new industry and paint a tank sales store etc, but Simutrans won't let you ship it with an official pakset no matter how excellent the technical aspects of the content is.

Pak96.comic comes with a complete chain for uranium, ending in a nuclear power plant. Not an addon.
Pak192.comic comes with a nuclear power plant. This time, it's a curiosity based on Zwentendorf.
Both seem fine to me. Not everyone likes nuclear power, but if you were to ask about coal power (in our day and age), you might get similar resentment. And some are even against windmills. I'd probably refrain from putting them in a japanese themed set, though - context matters.

I'm not sure anyone would realistically stop me if I painted a tank sales store and just put it into p192c. I mean, there is but one person who can forcefully stop me, and everyone else would basically have to fork the whole project to get rid of it, or has to ignore the entire pakset.
Though if I did put a tank sales store in, it would, per description, be for mums who get their kids from school and need a large vehicle for safety. I'd question whether that even counts as war industry.

IIRC the same place that mentions Simutrans to be nuclear and war free also claims no religious symbols. Well, my churches have crosses, and I'm not sure how a torii wouldn't be religious. The main complaint on religious grounds I got was against cat statues though, so who knows.

Therefore, I'd argue that there is no content management in place at all. It just so happens that there is no pakset author who is interested in creating wartime industry, probably because such a person would want wartime industry to result in more troop production to fight the enemy. Realistically, it's just people doing what they feel comfortable doing, and nobody is malicious. On the one hand, that means nothing will ever be so bad that it can be objectively require a ban, at most it offends some. On the other hand, it means nobody goes looking for what's missing, eg to ask which skin colors are available among pax in a set.

[KneeOn]

Leartin, thanks for clarifying those points. Clearly I mis understood, having read the entire thread of conflicting opinions and diverting conversations.

I was not aware of p96 or p192 coming with nuclear power and you raise a very good point about coal. I was also not aware of the religious symbols.

Until I saw that specific point I was going to reply mentioning that p64 is the only "official" Pak and had infact forgotten this. Paks supplied with the online installer I always considered vetted to a certain extent.

In the UK we have legislation - the Equalities Act 2010 which gives protected characteristics making it unlawful to discriminate on race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability or status as transgender. Perhaps that is a better and less objective framework, while retaining PEGI 13 for content not covered by the above.

Including a Nazi statue would discriminate but a church wouldn't.

Thankfully the community wouldn't engage with lots of the things mentioned.

The issue is not whether a furry is linked to sex is clearly subjective but given the number of people who do see the link, even if it isn't as far to say all furries engage in sex linked to the hobby, shows this does go close to the line and then how overt the content is becomes the deciding factor for the maintainer.

[RealAmerican1776]

It just so happens that there is no pakset author who is interested in creating wartime industry,

Actually in Pak128 Britain are there not wartime liveries for trains? And for mine, I want to add the USRA locomotives which was the nationalized U.S. Railroad during World War One

[KneeOn]

Liveries don't translate to industry. Explicit references to tank/fighter/arms are distinct and separate in 128.Britain.


We cannot exclude long serving units etc from paks based on their intro date.


We can exclude their purpose (in Nazi Germany a case) less trivial ways remind us of the reality of war and exclude where appropriate the references to the transportation of humans as an industry of war.


We can also hope that content creators don't go down war time industry for actual industry chains, I certainly do. Simutrans is not the platform for such a theme in my opinion.


How does this, for me, relate back to Furry Mart or more grown up humour in general?


We can include references to the humour that touch a subjective line (the issues of the reality of the furry subculture against popular perception not withstanding) because Simutrans is primarily an entertainment product with humourous elements. Think Theme Hospital, SimCity, Cities:Skylines. It is appropriate to the theme and goal of Simutrans being an entertainment product for all ages.


What is and isn't objectively appropriate is, for me, clear. War is not a theme appropriately explored by a game with an almost 8bit, fun soundtrack. Tongue in cheek references those of an appropriate age would understand and those not of that age wouldn't think anything of is appropriate.


For Furry Mart I do not think the reference to the subculture being sexual falls foul of this, regardless of if that connection is fully or even partially accurate.


With all things humour, it is subjective if it is not only obscene but also if it is discriminatory. I argue it is neither obscene not particularly discriminative to associate it with the popular understanding that it does form an adult joke.


TL:DR: war references will never suit the theme of the game. I get Furry Mart being sexualised may not be something everyone agrees with. I disagree it falls foul of any spirit of the game to include it either based on the flawed link or the suggestion it is sexual in its nature.

[RealAmerican1776]

Okay how about this, during the war, automobile manufactures and other industries here in the States started producing equipment for the war effort so Chrysler made engines for our tanks, Ford helped make airplanes, textile mills started making clothing for the troops etc. So in Simutrans, the same could happen

[Sirius]

In addition to the ethical discussion about this, did you consider the consequences to players?
These had to buy massive amounts of rolling stock and alter huge amounts of cargo lines for a few ingame years, after which they had to adjust it all again.
Most players would not do this.

[KneeOn]

In addition to the ethical discussion about this, did you consider the consequences to players?
These had to buy massive amounts of rolling stock and alter huge amounts of cargo lines for a few ingame years, after which they had to adjust it all again.
Most players would not do this.

That is an excellent point. A timeline where there are two major wars to deal with in game is not only unethical, it doesn't fit with the lack of random events in game nor does it follow that the various transport industries were either compelled or given state aid to move items.

Roadmaster, the lack of random events means that would not translate in to the game. Random events are not planned so either the factory creates these goods for all time, or not at all. You could make a time limited industry which builds extra factories between relevant years. Players may not engage with this given the costs required to move enough goods to make it profitable in a very short span of time, although it does pose an interesting scenario. I do believe that scenario could be posed in a pakset without having to have it be war related (such as a time limited industrial boom with retirement dates 5/10 years after introduction and no future industry spawns for this boom).

You, ultimately, are the creator of your work and if you want it to reflect the various real life events then go for it. Perhaps you can implement it in a way which deals with the issues raised during this ethical content conversation without it being too close to the sun as it were. I personally object to WWII or any war industries - it opens a door which we may not like within the community but I do understand the desire for total historical accuracy, even if I am willing to omit these periods of history from my own work in view of the wider theme of the game.

[RealAmerican1776]

I agree. In my Pak.256-America, I don't think I can recreate the chaos of American railroads during the early months of World War One where there were backups at yards and on the tracks. The railroads were just not prepared to haul troops and supplies cross country while changing schedules and orders on a dime. It was a mess. This is what ultimately led Woodrow Wilson to Nationalize the railroads in 1917. During World War Two, in order to avoid the chaos of World War One, the railroads were able to use each others lines to easily move goods around. I don't think I can recreate that either. I can still have USRA locomotives right? Many of the railroads used these even years after World War One.

[Isaac Eiland-Hall]

No need to get mad. Did I get mad when you presumed I wouldn't know the connotation of the word? There are many who don't, so the explaination was necessary, and someone who would compare a fursuit store to a sex store probably doesn't.

What I said was in the United States of America, "furry" has the connotation of those engaging in sex.

What I said was true.

I don't appreciate your treatment of me on this topic, so you can get as mad as you like.

I will be taking a break from the forum. I am reachable via email or other contacts.

[Phystam]

Isaac -- Can you separate this off-topic discussion? I understand that such kind of discussion is important, but the discussion is not related to pak256-ex.


Actually I did not know that word "furry" is related to something sexual since we are NEITHER English native speakers, NOR living in the US. Here in Japan, The way to touch such kind of culture is very limited.

Anyway I will replace the shop name in the next update.

[KneeOn]

Roadmaster - you can have whatever you want, but if you're asking of locos built during war are acceptable I personally would say yes. You're not simulating the effects of war per-se.

Phystam, you raise an important point on the meaning of different words in different cultures.

[Leartin]

In the UK we have legislation - the Equalities Act 2010 which gives protected characteristics making it unlawful to discriminate on race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability or status as transgender. Perhaps that is a better and less objective framework, while retaining PEGI 13 for content not covered by the above.

Well, if you get a job application and the applicant states "Furry" under "Hobbies", do you think you can legally turn him down based on that, or would it be discrimination? After all, you'd think of a sexual orientation and discriminate against it, even if the applicant has no sexual interest in furries.
If we used such a law as guideline, would it only mean to disallow game objects that engage in unlawful discrimination, or should it be applied to those managing the pakset - that is, one couldn't remove a gay bar from the pakset just because it's gay, since that would be discrimination - one would have to remove all bars, or find a completely different reason like lack of quality in the art. Which again would ask the question whether Furries wouldn't be protected against discrimination, and therefore a Furry Mart as well.

Okay how about this, during the war, automobile manufactures and other industries here in the States started producing equipment for the war effort so Chrysler made engines for our tanks, Ford helped make airplanes, textile mills started making clothing for the troops etc. So in Simutrans, the same could happen

Sure, but in Simutrans, it wouldn't change anything.
Ford produced planes even before WW2. It's not that planes were produced in the car assembly halls, there was a seperate plane production facility. In Simutrans, that would be a seperate factory.
Chrysler would be a motor producer. Another factory would take motors and other inputs to assemble cars. Now, if a tank factory spawned, it could also take motors from the same motor producer, or spawn it's own. Nothing about the motor producer itself would change.
Textile mills always make clothing. Whether a Walmart spawns and gets them or a Military Training Camp again doesn't matter to the game.

So really, what you are looking at is a Military end consumer and a tank producer as two seperate factories, while the regular industry would keep working as always with it's regular customers. As soon as the military end consumer spawns, it will use civil factories for production - how many depends on general pakset settings. In case of an American pakset, it wouldn't be strange to have them around even after the world war, given that military and weaponry has a more pronounced role in American culture. As in: I'd honestly expect military bases and guns sold at walmart in an American pakset, even though I wouldn't really want them in other paks.

[RealAmerican1776]

Right, I wouldn't do that and add all of those stuff in the game.

[KneeOn]

Well, if you get a job application and the applicant states "Furry" under "Hobbies", do you think you can legally turn him down based on that, or would it be discrimination? After all, you'd think of a sexual orientation and discriminate against it, even if the applicant has no sexual interest in furries.
If we used such a law as guideline, would it only mean to disallow game objects that engage in unlawful discrimination, or should it be applied to those managing the pakset - that is, one couldn't remove a gay bar from the pakset just because it's gay, since that would be discrimination - one would have to remove all bars, or find a completely different reason like lack of quality in the art. Which again would ask the question whether Furries wouldn't be protected against discrimination, and therefore a Furry Mart as well.

It would not be unlawful to discriminate against furries. The law protects specific characteristics which are more than merely a choice of hobby.

There is a difference between sexual interest/turn ons and sexual orientation. Those lines may be blurred at times but I don't think it can be argued that those who engage in the sexual aspects of the hobby are part of a sexual orientation in the meaning of that law.

I don't personally have a problem with Furry Mart. I think it's both silly to ignore the sexual aspect of the hobby or pretend it doesn't exist, given it's popular status as a meme within western popular/internet culture. I also think it's equally as silly to ban its inclusion. It's neither obscene or overt enough to bring the game in to adult territory. Phystams stance is it's been pointed out by a player and they'll remove it. That's Phystams shout as the maintainer. 

[Leartin]

There is a difference between sexual interest/turn ons and sexual orientation. Those lines may be blurred at times but I don't think it can be argued that those who engage in the sexual aspects of the hobby are part of a sexual orientation in the meaning of that law.

Don't forget the part of the law where it says that discrimination due to presumed characteristica still applies.
If someone who is "jewish-looking" doesn't get a job because he is "jewish-looking", that's still discrimination. No "Jew isn't a race, so it can't be racist" or anything like that.
If people read "Furry" and think "Ah, a person with an interest in anthropomorphic animals, who might even have a fursona and go to conventions. It's a hobby they do in their free time... eh, rejected" that's fine. Even though I don't see why they would do that.
If people read "Furry" and think "Ah, I've seen that on CSI in '03 and know the memes, terrible people, I fear for the company dog - rejected!" then they take a decision based on a presumed sexual orientation. Whether that exists or not doesn't matter.

We could ask the same question about crossdressers. Men who like to wear female clothing as a hobby. Your explaination would still work - dressing in female clothes is a hobby. Having sex in them might just be part of that hobby, rather than a sexual orientation, and just from being a crossdresser we don't even know if they do it. In truth, I'd argue crossdressing itself is not protected based on the information given so far, but if the employer mistakes the crossdresser for a transsexual and doesn't employ him because of that, it becomes a discrimination issue, whether the crossdresser is in actuality transsexual or not.

Though I admit, the UK law seems to be lacking. After all, they don't even acknowledge nonbinary people to exist, and define sexual orientation with the same, opposite, or both genders.

I think it's both silly to ignore the sexual aspect of the hobby or pretend it doesn't exist, given it's popular status as a meme within western popular/internet culture.

Do you know how popular "Queen killed Diana" memes are? (or were, for a while) - so, does that mean we can't ignore the queen might be a murderer when discussing whether buckingham palace get's into a set? Or would it be silly to adress a meme like that?
I won't repeat how little popularity of misinformation should affect things.

Phystams stance is it's been pointed out by a player and they'll remove it. That's Phystams shout as the maintainer.

Phystams case is just a translation error - there never was shop for furries, and that's fine.
If I went and removed all pedestrians, replacing them with blonde, blue-eyed white men, would that be my shout as the maintainer? I surely hope there would be some protest.

[RealAmerican1776]

Do you know how popular "Queen killed Diana" memes are? (or were, for a while) - so, does that mean we can't ignore the queen might be a murderer when discussing whether buckingham palace get's into a set? Or would it be silly to adress a meme like that?

What about the White House for my Pak256-America? Every President up to Lincoln owned slaves and kept them at the White House. Would people still be OK if I add the White House to the pakset knowing that?

[KneeOn]

Leartin, I think you're taking points made to you to the extreme and engaging in counter productive whataboutism.

Furries are not the same as those of the Jewish faith and I find it insulting that you'd even compare the two in the context of what content is and isn't acceptable.

Similarly, the suggestion about the Queen and Diana and if we can reasonably suggest it is a poor whataboutism.

Like wise transgenderism in any of its forms (including what used to be known as cross dressing, gender bending or dressing in drag) is separate and distinct from furry culture. Furry culture does not form part of or effect all of us in the same way race, religion, gender (including transgender status or lack of), sexual orientation etc etc.

I think it's simple.

Knowledge of furries in the mainstream of internet and popular culture is wholly linked to the subsection which engages in a very real sexual kink.

That sexual kink is not the same, as you may say, as transgender people engaging in sexual activity.

You can argue the finer and somewhat obtuse points of sexuality alone. My stance is clear.

Memes, although unreliable, do bring subcultures to the forefront and sometimes it's not in a nice way. Frankly, with the fursona/furry convention/whatever I don't mind what they do but I think in this context being offended on their behalf (or if you are one and don't wish to disclose that is fine) is silly.

You're not arguing against the ugly and grotty details of Nazism, you're not arguing for the plight and struggles of LGBT people.

You're arguing some people interpreting Furry Shop as a joke is actually an affront on a protected characteristic.

Short, UK answer is that all of the comparisons defy common sense and would not stand up in law because frankly and in my opinion they are ridiculous comparisons.

I don't think it is kind, right or in the spirit of the game to compare the matters at hand with the way in which you've raised them i.e. leave comparing the plight of furries away from the plight of Jews, LGBT people or other actual protected characteristics. 

Ones decision to be a furry is not in the same league as race, sexuality, religion etc. Stop trying to make it one.

In my opinion of course.

[RealAmerican1776]

No, I agree, I don't care what they do either. In my opinion if your into that stuff well good for you. I try to be open minded to other cultures and believes. Now before anyone begins, I brought this up because I didn't know if other people would have a problem with the name.

[DrSuperGood]

I am very disappointed that no where during this topic was an image of the actual building that started it linked. Without an actual image to put with the name, it is just a name and one cannot imply the stores function, or if that function might not be age appropriate.

Here in the UK there is a reasonably large second hand electronics shop chain called CeX. In case people have not guessed where this is going it is quite literally pronounced the same as "sex" and happily airs adverts emphasizing its company name during the middle of the day.

Personally I would have no objections with the original shop's name, especially given that this is a Japanese themed pakset and as such many of the names are either going to be phonetic in nature or prone to misinterpretation due to cultural differences.

I recommend pakset authors stay away from content that is generally considered unsuitable for children in most countries in the world. For example avoid representing the sex trade (brothel), using swear words in descriptive text and names (unnecessary, not nice), showing blood and gore (no pools of blood around abattoir with animation of animal being decapitated, could upset some people), showing disturbing scenes (scenes of crimes, bullying, violence e.t.c. as could upset some people) and anything involving drugs or other normally illegal activities. Although children are not allowed to gamble in most countries, there seems to be little done to hide its existence from children with gambling adverts being played non-stop during the day in the UK, as such I would say representation of such buildings as part of the scenery such as monuments or commercial buildings could be considered fine. If your pakset intends to represent any feature that might not be considered appropriate for children in a large part of the world then I strongly recommend making that clear where ever the pakset is made available so people, and parents, know what they can expect.

[Flemmbrav]

I would love to correct two things stated before:

1. I do not believe that crossdressers are transgender per se. There might be transgenders that crossdress, but that does not make crossdressing a thing only transgenders do. In fact I'd bet that most transgenders, that crossdress, only do this, because they do not feel valid / or because of social discrimination against transgenders.

2. I have yet to hear from someone choosing their fetishes. You might not have to practice them, but that's actually pretty much the same as with religion. While I do believe that historicly speaking these are not treated equal, down to basic ethics you could argue that you did not choose your fetish and shall not be discriminated because of that.


There's something different i wanted to contribute to all this too:
It's the question on how the game should behave politicly.
I am a very political person. It's hard to not show that in my art. And parts of my art at part of the game.
Now you might say "well just don't pick the ones that are politcal", but it's not that easy.
I started to think of how to replace fossile fuel vehicles in the pakset. If we could manage to ditch them by 2025.
If there would not be a single vehicle running fossiles to sale in 2025, would that be a political statement? Hell yes it would be!
It might even be one if i made fossile fueled vehicles more expensive by then.

Now why is this relevant in this debate: I just showed you, that doing political statements is a thing in simutrans.
We do that all the time, and there's nothing wrong with it. Not showing slaves on a cotton farm is a statement. Not transporting inprisoners in freight cars is one. And showing a furry market might be one too.
No one would have to google on why that thing is called "furry market" even tho it just sells costumes. But if you know what it is, can you live with it? If you can't, why not?
Is this any different from removing fossiles?
Is this any different from making coke with or without cokain?
Alcohol and sugar are drugs too, and we have plenty of that in the pak192.comic. Might argue that these are culture? Might as well argue that these are drugs we should get rid of culturaly.
What about the nuclear power plant that doesn't operate?
We have a police system without crimes? Oh and don't tell me you didn't play with police toys as a kid...

The thing i take away from this whole thread is that we should be more bold and frequent with our political statements in the game.
And I totally do not mind putting 12+ on the pakset because of it.

[RealAmerican1776]

Here in the UK there is a reasonably large second hand electronics shop chain called CeX. In case people have not guessed where this is going it is quite literally pronounced the same as "sex" and happily airs adverts emphasizing its company name during the middle of the day.

I actually found out that where I live there is a new company called "Blow-in-Blanket" and they do air conditioning I believe or something along those lines. Anyway, to me, that sounds sexual like someone is giving a you-know-what while under the blankets. Now, in this area of the country prostitution is legal so we have places where you can go to have sex or look or whatever floats your boat such as the Bunny Ranch. Granted these have to be off the beaten path and can't be seen from the highway, but if you drive toward the Bunny ranch, you'll see signs that have two bunnies going at it and speed limit sign that says 69. Again these can't be seen from the highway. If your into more... exotic stuff, there is an alien themed sex joint down near Las Vegas.

[KneeOn]

Flemmbrav, I agree with a lot of your points. Especially regarding politics - in the UK transport is its self a political matter. I too am a very political person and I work in the public sector in a very, very politicised sector.

There is a way to include politics in game in an appropriate manner. We had an ad campaign where someone would moan about daily life and their friend would remind them they "don't do politics" because so many of those issues were actually political.

That said, there is a fine line between a game which represents political issues in a tactful and inclusive manner and Simutrans becoming a fully fledged political game. Removing the extreme fringes, it is wholly possible for two people to hold different views and both be reasonable.

Content creators might let their politics influence the art and that's their freedom of expression but consideration should be given to the spirit of the game.

I feel politicising Furry Mart as an attack on the furry community for it's link or perceived link to a sexual kink is way over that line.

You raise a good point around sexual attractions and terminology used - no one chooses theirs, I absolutely accept that was lazy wording. I still maintain the position that kinks are not the same as sexual orientation. Kinks are ones enjoyment, sexual orientation goes beyond the sexual and includes ones right to love the person they love. Comparing the furry communities "oppression" for want of a better word, to that of Jews or LGBT people for me is a massive and distasteful reach which is why I have been so vocal about it.

DrSupergood, I forgot about being 12 and laughing at CeX! I agree with a lot of your points also

Double entendres and sly, cheeky innuendo in the manner of similar games of old (sim city, theme hospital et Al) are different from the explicit mature content.

I genuinely believe Furry Mart falls under the category of double entendre and that sly joke is not abusive or otherwise so discriminatory it becomes obscene.

[RealAmerican1776]

I forgot about being 12 and laughing at CeX!

Hey, I'm 24 and I still laugh at Slot World! Because in my head it sounds like Slut World.

[Leartin]

Leartin, I think you're taking points made to you to the extreme and engaging in counter productive whataboutism.

Furries are not the same as those of the Jewish faith and I find it insulting that you'd even compare the two in the context of what content is and isn't acceptable.

Similarly, the suggestion about the Queen and Diana and if we can reasonably suggest it is a poor whataboutism.

Like wise transgenderism in any of its forms (including what used to be known as cross dressing, gender bending or dressing in drag) is separate and distinct from furry culture.

Whataboutism is a 'technique' where you deflect criticism on a topic by simply criticising something else. As an example, if someone were to create a weapon industry for Simutrans and someone starts questioning whether that's okay, it would be whataboutism to point fingers at p96c and complain about the uranium chain, asking "what about them?".
If, in the same scenario, rather than questioning whether a weapon industry is okay, someone claims that 'no pak can ship with nuclear or wartime industry.', it's quite fair to point out that the statement isn't true, by using the otherwise unrelated existing chain in p96c as proof. That's not whataboutism, it's showing a contradiction.
If that person questions why a weapon industry should be banned, citing other games that include weapons industry where it's not ill-received, that's not whataboutism, it's giving examples.
If that person questions why a weapon industry should be banned, while other 'questionable' chains such alcohol exist, that's not whataboutism, that's comparing. [It would be up to the complainer to show the difference. "Because people die from it." or "Because it's a restricted item" or "it shouldn't be glorified" - except those examples wouldn't work.]

With that out of the way, let's delve deeper.
Jews: What I did is clarify that you can be discriminated against for something that isn't factual true. In case that's still not clear, step by step: Jews are not a race. Antisemitism, the hate/discrimination of Jews, is considered racism. You cannot claim that, since there is no jewish race, discriminating against a jew is lawful. It's racism because those who do it typically believe there is a jewish race that can be seen in body features, and don't care for the religion practiced by the individual (hence it's not religious discrimination).
It's a rather simple concepts, really - you cannot check whether a person belongs to a protected minority in order to decide whether unlawful discrimination happened. You need to check the intentions and believes of the perpetrator.
I can make a harmless comparison as well: If a bouncer blocks a girl with glasses, braces and a sweater from entering the club because he thinks she is too ugly, it doesn't matter if she does the typical ugly duckling movie transformation into a hottie - despite her being beautiful, she still was 'discriminated' against for being ugly.
Once again, same is true for Furries.

Taking such an explaination and rather than digesting it just shortening it to "compares Furries to Jews" is, by the way, borderline strawman argumentation.


Queen and Diana: The question here is whether or not meme misinformation is relevant. IF meme misinformation is relevant and should be part of discussions, THEN one would need to discuss the Queen as a murderer, since that is an ongoing meme. My point is that we shouldn't need to discuss the Queen as a murderer, and in order to get there, my claim is that meme misinformation is irrelevant. However, if meme misinformation is irrelevant, the connotation of Furries to sexual activities is removed, since that's also just meme misinformation, not hard facts.
This has nothing to do with whataboutism. Here, I used an example to show you why your logic is flawed. Of course, only insofar as you explained it/I perceived it. You now have the chance to show how it makes sense to treat misinformation seriously in case of Furries, but disregard it in case of the Queen; Why Furries could be removed for being wrongfully associated with sex, while the Queen, wrongfully associated with murder, may stay.

Need a comparison for why it works that way? Okay, here it goes: Person A complains about something insignificant. Person B then says "If you don't have anything good to say, keep your mouth shut.". Person A counters "So we shouldn't talk about slavery?"
This is not comparing something insignificant to slavery, and neither is it whataboutism. Rather, it applies Person B's logic and comes to a conclusion. [In case that's not clear: The logic steps are: "I can't say anything positive about Slavery. If I can't say something positive, I shouldn't say anything. Hence, I can't talk about Slavery."] Hopefully, person B disagrees with the conclusion. That means they have two options: Rectify or clarify their logic, or show a flaw in the reasoning. Showing the flaw works if A puts words in B's mouth. For example, if A's counter was "So we never should say anything?", there would be a clear dissonance. It's not a logical conclusion from B's statement, which clearly allows to say something - just not only bad things. But if the logic is sound, B needs to rectify their statement (they were wrong and admit it) or clarify it (eg. they only meant not to talk badly about specific people in public, not to never mention anything bad, ever.)
Why involve Slavery? The goal is to show B why their logic is wrong. In order to do so, their logic must lead to a conclusion they disagree with. If it was "So I shouldn't talk about my uncle Jack?", B might just say: "If you don't have anything nice to say about him, no, don't" without even knowing Jack. It must be something that people generally would agree it's a bad idea to be silent about. "So I shouldn't tell anyone if I was mistreated?", for example, works, because it's clear that you should be vocal about it, despite there not being any good about it.

Of course it's a known phrase, so a misunderstanding wouldn't even arise, but that's what makes for a simple example.


Transgender: First of all, there is nothing "used to be known as cross-dressing" - cross-dressing is still the correct term for cross-dressing, the somewhat outdated term is transvestitism (though still in use). Cross-dressing simply means wearing clothes of the other gender - for example, Cloud in FFVII cross-dresses. Do it regularly, and you are a cross-dresser. It does not make you transgender - you can be birth-assigned male and identify as male, making you cisgender, yet cross-dresser. Actually, if you are transgender and wear clothes of the sex you identify with, you wouldn't technically be a cross-dresser.
Something does not need to be something else for a comparison to work. Case in point: Early on in this thread, you suggested using adult humor in kids TV as a guideline. That's a comparison. Simply stating "Simutrans is not kids TV" would be incredibly pointless.

Ones decision to be a furry is not in the same league as race, sexuality, religion etc. Stop trying to make it one.

That's just your claim. You don't have any basis for that, except your own believes, which you repeatedly explained to come from memes - that makes you an expert, I guess.
This is written in the ECHR.

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

Certainly, they don't state furries specifically, but your talk about a "league" becomes very thin when sex, race and religion are equalled to language, opinion and 'other status' (which goes as far as trade union membership)

All in all: Having specific characteristics which can't be discriminate against, while all other characteristics are fair play, is simply absurd. It's the act that counts. Perpetuating lies about a group, treating them unfairly, is always wrong - and I don't care if the group mistreated is on some list or not.
Do you need to google whether Uyghurs count as race or religion in UK law to know whether China discriminates them? If people born on the 13th of the month wouldn't get jobs due to superstition, would it be okay since day of birth is not on the list? And in the very same vein, if you don't include a building in Simutrans because it's related to a group falsly rumored to do morally questionable things, should you really ask "Is that group on my list of protected minorities?" rather then treating every group with equal respect in the first place so you never have to consult the **** list?

I have a very simple rule of thumb. Just remove the specific group from the sentence in question, or replace it with other groups. It's either discrimatory against any group you write in, or it's no discrimination. "Kill all [Group]!" is always bad, while "Statistically speaking, [Group] are involved in slightly more traffic accidents than [Other Group]" is fine. And by that logic, "It's an ongoing rumor that [Group] are involved in [Bad thing], hence [Group] shouldn't be represented in the game." is simply wrong, no matter what you insert.

If it still doesn't make sense to you -  well, too bad.

I am very disappointed that no where during this topic was an image of the actual building that started it linked. Without an actual image to put with the name, it is just a name and one cannot imply the stores function, or if that function might not be age appropriate.

That's because the actual building is just a plain store. There is nothing flashy about it that could imply anything.

showing blood and gore (no pools of blood around abattoir with animation of animal being decapitated, could upset some people),
showing disturbing scenes (scenes of crimes, bullying, violence e.t.c. as could upset some people) and
anything involving drugs or other normally illegal activities.

Three checks for p192c. The (S)Laughterhouse has windows showing cows sawed in half by giant circular saws; the last window simply shows processed steaks.
The protest seen in the Dictator Monument happens at another building. While there are 5 pixels of ketchup bottle, there still is a lot of red around people lying on the ground for a performance protest.
Our Coke uses the original formula with koka-leaves from the koka-plantation.

Given that even pokemon has an age restriction of 12+ and 'comic' might attract kids more than other paksets, a disclaimer seems like a reasonable idea - we can add that on the git, not sure how the installer would handle it.

[KneeOn]

I think you're upset because you're a furry or like to be offended on behalf of other people. Issac is right, this is tiresome.

I won't engage with someone who uses their faux academic use of language to make points on a technicality and who fails to grasp the reality in which you make those points.

You've compared the terrible plight of Jewish populations and oppression of LGBT people to someone associating Furry Mart to Furries and Furries to sex. That is abhorrent and I think you're doing this now because you enjoy being against the grain. If you truly believe that all struggles are equal and make the jump from hobby and sexual kink to world wars, riots and genocide that's a mark of your character, not mine.

I don't want to argue with someone who insults my intelligence with thinly veiled insults. My intelligence comes from working in environments in which most of the population would never cope with and my grasp of what is actually worth arguing about comes from these experiences. I get worked up about real things, not these fake or pointless outrages on communities who, frankly, are not so vulnerable their struggles compare to some of humanities worst injustices.

Your simple rule is just that, it's simple. It ignores the nuances that life actually has, and if you want to be so bitter about how your hobby is perceived on this game that's absolutely fine. I suggest you tell oppressed people your rule. See how well it goes down.

I'm done arguing with you.

[prissi]

I am a little late to this (since it is hidden here very well), but I would consider myself furry in the athromorphic animal part (which is a quite long word) since ca. 1992, when I discovered that there are more people on the internet (or usenet) that enjoy phantasising (literature and art) about them. The whole sexual this came much later with mainstreaming, and it came from the US. (Something between 2000 and 2005.) At least around this time suddenly a lot more explicit images popped up. My theory to that is that compared to Europe the stronger suppression of anything explicit in US media was one of the driving forces to that. This has indeed came to some long serving sites now show more genitials just for showing them off than five or ten years ago.

Therefore, while I am well aware of the sexual connotations, at least for laymen, there is indeed a division in the art community. For instance, things too hardcore for "deviat art" usually go to "Fur affinity" to name two popular art archives. Old school "furry" like me (who rather are there for the what if and not really because I have any suppressed bestiality to live out) have probably coined the term Yiff around 2000. This website give a widely accepted defintion, as Leartin meantined
https://www.askdifference.com/furry-vs-yiff/

However, since the term furry has cute conations and thus was considered harmless, previously US college students (but of course not only them) somewhat highjacked it into the sexual area after 2000. That is probably why "furry" almost became a mainstream "gender" in the US, while it is still more of a niche in Europe. (exaggerating of course) Hence different and not very problematic co-notations of furry in different cultures. And I did not start on Japanese furry mascots, which you find literally everywhere, including in official paphlets on how to declare your building tax (at least in Nagoya), which was a furry mole and a birdperson (of undefined gender), of you wonder.

And of course most things consentual sexual are much less a taboo in Germany (or North-West-Central Europe). This is reflected by very different movie ratigns. A long kiss scene would do nothing to a Germany film rating, why it could push it into adult for the US. (And vice versa, voilence, e.g. "Red Heat" which was from 6 in the US was an adult only movie for excessive voilence in Germany ...)

To conclude a furry mart would be no problem in Japan or in Germany (or most part in Europe) and almost everybody would think of pets. (And 100 year ago the woudl expected mostly pelts, but this is another story ... ) Not so in the US (and maybe Canada, no idea really.) So while the internet brings us closer together, we have still different cultures with different conotations of what is considered proper, and apparently what is furry beyond the Cambridge dictionary meaning https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/furry Wvwn webster does no list furry in the meaning discussed here. Hmm

(Now even more offtopic:)
On that relation, the recent mangling of English with "choose your pronon" is also until extremely recently an America only thing. Until at least 2015 the only persons allowed to use "they" as their pronoun where the queens and the pope ... Somehow I wonder why people feel the need to differenciate: The only reason I can think is elitism, to feel better than the rest. Which, even though these things have been introduced to foster tolerance, in the end are rather antisocial for the whole society. Personally, I rather avoid labeling people (even if they label themselves) as much as possible to avoid prejustice from any side. In that regard, it is somewhat telling, that the wikipedia article on Furry ending also that "Furry" people view themselves as elite, sigh

[Leartin]

On that relation, the recent mangling of English with "choose your pronon" is also until extremely recently an America only thing. Until at least 2015 the only persons allowed to use "they" as their pronoun where the queens and the pope ... Somehow I wonder why people feel the need to differenciate: The only reason I can think is elitism, to feel better than the rest.

The "need to differenciate" did not start with "they" - we already differentiated between "he" and "she" long before that. Using the proper pronoun is just common courtesy - whenever I was adressed with a female pronoun (due to long hair), I'd quickly correct them, and I'm pretty sure it's the same for everyone. Never would I think it elitist to do so, or that it could mean I'd feel superior over females.
When talking to people, it's often your choice whether you want them to adress you by first name, last name or nickname. In German, you choose between "Sie" and "Du". It depends a bit on the circumstances what's appropriate, but it's still your choice.
If you'd call my mum "Ma'am"*, she'd bite off your head. Not literally, but she doesn't like being called Ma'am, would tell you so, and you better not forget. Nobody really knows why, yet I can't think of anyone ever disrespecting her wishes on how to be adressed.
Given all those choices and preferences in how we adress each other already, with none of them seen as elitist, is it really so weird for someone to choose that "he" and "she" doesn't have the right ring for them, and prefer "they" or "xe" or whatever (especially if they are nonbinary)?

Note that "they" wasn't choosen because it was reserved for royalty, but because it was already used in english as gender neutral third person singular, as in "Somebody forgot their umbrella."

[* Just pointing out - I translated here, what she really doesn't like is "Gnä'Frau"]

[prissi]

I am well aware of English pronons, thank you. (Spent four years at Cambridge, UK). Furthermore, they was a rather will choice, there were also it/shir/... Interestingly wikipedia says it was introduced "as a way of promoting equity and inclusion for transgender and genderqueer" even though it will bring rather the exact opposite and will alianate a good number of people. In a recent workshop in the Boston area (for tenured professors!), everyone had to write their preferred pronoun on a button. It felt so strange.

I wonder, if next is a mandatory beacon on my smartpohone, beaming marreid heterosexual male, fluent in ..., he/him, and whatever to promote freedom. To me, it feels so much like big brother. But then, different cultures apparently. However, this is getting even more offtopic.

[Flemmbrav]

I got you fam!


But that aside, I much prefer "they/them" over no pronons at all. I have two friends i shall call by name exclusivly, and I much much more prefer to just use they/them as these are pronons for unknown cases as well. And I don't want to call them an object by calling them "it". It doesn't seem to be an exclusive american thing - at least I do know some european people that want me to use genderneutral terms as well.
I started to see pronons as part of someone's name. But I may as well be more used to it than the median person out there.

Well, but this is fully offtopic. The interface of the game should be genderneutral regardless, and the pedestrians are too small to show buttons for pronons anyways.

[* Just pointing out - I translated here, what she really doesn't like is "Gnä'Frau"]

My lord please no that sounds horrible! At least use "Gnädige Frau" instead! No one wants to talk in that weird langauge you use in the mountains.


On the topic of what should fit in the game:
Most paksets use a certain area for reference. It might be best to stick to the culture of these areas. Thus, I would not mind a furry market in pak128.japan or pak192.comic - but if people from the US have an issue with it, maybe it should not be in a pakXYZ.usa?

[Isaac Eiland-Hall]

Speaking as a USian, my humble opinion is that while there is nothing wrong with the name, because of the connotation, renaming it might be better.

As an analogy, say we had characters in Simutrans - the mayors of towns, for example. And one was named "Seymour Butts", which is a perfectly legitimate name, but one that would cause giggles. Perhaps giggles are wanted, in which case, by all means, use the name. But if giggles are not wanted, perhaps other names would be better.

That, ultimately, in my opinion on this. There will be people who read the name a certain way. If nobody cares that people will do that, then no reason to change the name. If people care that people will do that, perhaps another name might serve better.

Ultimately,  IF it is a problem, is it a big problem or small problem? Oh, it's tiny, IF it's a problem at all.