Topic on Talk:Ortiz Lopez

This is a fork of the conversation that began in Concern About Lopez's Community Lore, specifically focusing now on the relationship between Ortiz Lopez and Pitching Machine. In summary, some contributors (in this case Lilypad and Winds) have expressed concern over the framing & nature of this relationship as it relates to acceptable content on this wiki, with concern that it is overly sexualized.

It is worth noting that this is hardly the first time this conversation has occurred on the subject of Ortiz Lopez & Pitching Machine. We, the wiki team, have previously ruled that the content currently on the page in that section is acceptable for our wiki. If innuendo based on word replacement was sufficient to breach a PG-13 rating, the Count would not be acceptable on Sesame Street. If discussions of consent are inherently sexual, then that sets bad precedent for the many non-sexual situations where consent plays an important role (e.g. a friend infodumping when you're exhausted and don't have the energy to listen).

We would like to direct your attention to our critique guide, specifically the sections Be Specific, and Offer Solutions and It’s Okay to Not Like Things. Winds' critique about the reference to Chuck Tingle is a good example of specificity, though we would appreciate a suggested solution to go along with it (e.g. "could you change the name so that is less clearly a parody of Chuck Tingle, known gay erotica author"). "This seems really sexualized, Won't Somebody Think Of The Children" is both extremely nonspecific and raises red flags for us that someone is trying to make something they personally dislike or are uncomfortable with into a moral issue. If the quality of critique doesn't improve, we will enforce a standardized feedback format, as we are extremely tired of dealing with this issue.

i really dont like that you're characterizing my critique as "won't somebody think of the children" when i am a literal minor telling you that i am uncomfortable. this isnt me pointing at hypothetical kids telling you to think about them, it's me pointing at myself telling you to think about me.

and again this is different from the count because you make explicit reference to a gay erotica writer. and it's being written and shared between children and adults and is not like television in that way because its a lot more interactive of an environment. and also it's just generally written with pretty clear reference to sexual relationships lmao

Lilypad, for the third time, I am going to ask that you make suggestions to pair with your critique. If you are against sexualization of any sort on this wiki, then I'm sorry to say that you are not looking for a PG-13 rating. Our decision to allow PG-13 content is a compromise between the adults, many of whom (including myself) are queer and are as-such extremely sensitive to concerns about our relationships and identities being seen as inherently sexual & inappropriate for children, and the presence of minors within the Blaseball fandom that reasonably should not be exposed to explicitly sexual or other vice-heavy content. If you are uncomfortable with where we have drawn the line, the only solution I can offer you is to stop reading this wiki. You are looking for a product that we cannot provide.

i think having sexualization in a space with minors being shared interactively Is Actually Preetty Fucking Weird and it makes me feel less safe being in this community as a result. you can write about queerness and queer relationships without including stuff that's so weirdly eroticized you could literally say it's a work by chuck tingle a couple paragraphs later. and if that's where we're drawing the line and you don't actually care about sexual work being shared between minors and adults then i guess you're right this community isn't a good space for minors and i will leave. "pg-13" movies aren't the same as pg-13 communities. pg-13 movies are not interactive and can have room for sexualization because it's not like adults and kids are literally sharing sexual work between each other interactively, and commenting on each other's sexual work. a pg-13 community would be less sexual than a literal pg-13 movie.

goodbye!

As the author of the PM x Ortiz section, I would greatly appreciate if you would not infer what is "generally written with pretty clear reference to sexual relationships". I can see how these things COULD be read that way, but as I said in my lengthy post that breaks down my entire mindset and intent of writing this section and the inspiration behind it all that it was NOT the intent or objective. If I missed my mark, I apologize for that.

Thank You.

link you'll notice that i also posted a few comments talking about how lack of intent can still produce an article that clearly has uncomfortable elements or has uncomfortable subtext. i dont actually care at all about your intent or mindset, i care about what the article says and what the article says bothers me.

We will take your suggestion under consideration as we continue to rework the article and tone it down. Thank you.

so, i'll preface this by saying i'm a trans minor myself. i understand where this sentiment is coming from-- it is far too prevalent in a lot of media. however, while you may feel like this is "overly sexual" in some capacity, ultimately you cannot speak for all trans minors. as the mods and multiple other people have said, all of her wiki falls under the pg-13 guidelines. some people may not like the page, others are completely fine with it. this sort of thing happens all the time. (i know personally, i do not have any issue with it whatsoever). you cannot speak for an entire demographic just because you feel very strongly about this one thing. this isn't me coming after you in any way, but ultimately it is just your opinion, you cannot decide that everyone has to feel the way you do

im not speaking for anyone but myself when i voice my discomfort, and if you look at what i said in my messages im only talking about my own discomfort. just because i do not represent the hive mind of trans kids doesn't mean my discomfort suddenly doesnt matter, and im glad for you feel like this article doesnt make you uncomfortable but if one person is comfortable and one person is uncomfortable there's still discomfort in the room

no offense, but if an incredibly small group is saying something is uncomfortable, and everyone else is saying that it's fine, and it is also within the rules of the wiki, i think it's fine.

Another questioning minor here, the solution to your problem is either not to engage with the wiki, or not to engage with this part of the wiki. Because the wiki is not a hard lore book, and you can change anything you want in your interpretations. Secondly the room metaphor is good and all, but in a room with thousands of people the best you can do is set rules that are good for most people, hence the compromise for pg-13.

I would like to be clear that I am not trying to make a statement on whether or not the content on the page should be on the wiki or not, or whether it violates the rules of the wiki.

I didn't really offer a solution because I don't personally think that I have a good one, nor do I want to say that there is inherently a problem with that sort of joke. Kids media makes jokes about the existence of sexual things and innuendos all the time, and I'm not really trying to start about the discussion of that being appropriate or not.

So what I'm trying to say is that I was just trying to point out that the existence of the chuck tingle reference feels incongruent with the rest of the section *if the intent is for it being nonsexualized/not an inuendo*

If it is intended to be an innuendo then it fits in. I don't want to say "Just remove it" as a solution, because that feels disingenuous. Because if it's intended to be as, at least a joke about a thing that *could* be interpreted as sexualized, but isn't necessarily *inherently* sexualized, (which would put it firmly into innuendo range) then I think it makes sense, but if it doesn't, I'd say it should be removed, or, maybe changed to a general jab about the trends of YA novel titles?

Sorry if my first post came across wrong?

Need to make a pretty direct admin announcement here.

First off, I want to apologize to Winds for stealing the thunder here--I think people should continue to discuss that thread. I don't think your comment came across wrong so much as entered an already heated conversation at a strange time.

I would like to reiterate, again, that this character has been a target for frequent and increasingly rough discourse around the policing of queer bodies and sexuality. We understand that there is a bit of discomfort with the portrayal of the Ortiz and Pitching Machine relationship here but it is well within the grounds of what we, in partial consultation with the Blaseball discord groundskeepers, would accept regarding interpersonal relationships.

We're not going to remove this material on community safety grounds and that decision is final. If the community wants to continue to work in tandem to make changes to this material for other reasons, I encourage you to continue discussing it. The wiki cannot be everything for everyone and we err on the side of expression (again, within bounds) when it comes to content that can cause passionate reactions.

I am available for private replies to this if you do not feel comfortable discussing on this thread. nesbitt#1991 is the best way to reach me on Discord.

i havent been following this (but i got 13 notifications about it lmao), but i just saw the chuckle tingle joke and oh my god does that read as just, really, really unfortunate innuendo to my awful brain.

that said, the rest of the pitching machine stuff reads totally fine to me, and if you do feel the need to change the chuck tingle joke, maybe something like "Love Bites: My Phlebotomy with the Unlimited Tacos Pitching Machine" would keep the essence of the joke. (that's my best attempt at a SFW chuck tingle okay (seriously, chuck tingle and vampires, what a minefield, my condolences))

As someone who had never heard of chuck tingle before this section came under scrutiny, I really like this both as a way to address complaints and just as a funnier joke (to me). Thank you Snerkus, very cool!