Five Nights at Freddy's

I'll be honest, I've kinda gotten tired of the immature "(supposedly unproblematic person here) created (game made by problematic person here)" meme.

I feel bad for the LGBT fandom, I really do, but god damn it, I wish nobody had to fucking bring up politics for the billionth time on Twitter... (and apparently, what started all this was a Reddit post that brought up his political campaign donations for the lolz! I just really don't like people sometimes!)

(pagetopper, what a surprise)

Edited by AngrokVa on Jun 12th 2021 at 11:19:20 AM

Frankly mirrors my thoughts

Its this crazed notion that association of Any level = 100% support you are a drone you have no thought for yourself.

Everything you've done is invalid, You are impure you must be purged for our beautiful sinless world

Edited by FrozenWolf2 on Jun 12th 2021 at 10:29:39 AM

The key point here is that he donated to a specific set of people, across party lines, and the only uniting feature of all of them is that all of them have a noticeable anti-LGBT+ position that is no secret (and this isn't even getting into how a lot of people he donated are shockingly horrifically terrible people who support terrible). So if he isn't homophobic/transphobic himself, then he looked at all these people with their blatant anti-LBGT+ policies and decided that was not a deal breaker.

What a lovely little strawman you've made. How much time did you spend on making that?

Edited by fredhot16 on Jun 12th 2021 at 8:48:03 AM

The issue, to me, is it's hard for me to see how anyone with a functioning sense of morality look at Republicans and say "more of that, please." That and supporting Republicans on religious grounds implies you consider them heaven-worthy. If so, I will take Hell and gladly. Considering I'm not trying to strawman anything, this is just my genuine feeling on the matter. No more, no less.

That said, my feelings are mixed. I don't like that Cawthon's mixed up with that crowd, but I can't say I'm surprised, given the religious background aspect of it. A more selfish part of me prefers to just say "fuck it" and enjoy FNAF regardless. To paraphrase someone else (can't remember if it's here on the forums or a discord I'm in) the creation has outgrown the creator enough that maybe I can.

Still, I'd say I'm not going to pay Cawthon money anymore, but I haven't bought a FNAF product since Sister Location (or Pizzeria Simulator if that wasn't free)

Wasn't there also something particular about the total amount of money he donated, like $933 was a significant number or something?

I know. You got your post in before I did, so thought I'd add that detail in.

Edited by sgamer82 on Jun 12th 2021 at 8:50:36 AM

Directly donating hundreds of dollars to people is not the same as just being associated with them.

I was addressing Frozen's "sinless world" crack, not your own words. Sorry if that got mixed up.

Edited by fredhot16 on Jun 12th 2021 at 8:45:22 AM

If it was just voting that's fine, there are a lot of people who don't have the time or the energy to dig into politics and what policies really are. If he was just donating to Republicans then hey, maybe he buys into the idea that they're better for the economy (they're really not, but that's another topic entirely). But the fact that he went out and he donated to one democrat who just so happened to also be anti-LBGT+ on top of a whole laundry list of bad things she supports pushes this into "how could you coincidentally donated to a whole bunch of homophobes?"

That would probably be one of those you'd have to ask what the logic was

Then again as you said most people don't meticulously research their candidates, usually they'll find the one policy they agree with and support them for that

Its terrible logic but then again a lot of people use it

In that respect I'm no better in my own way. I don't have any particular hot-button topic, so I value competence above all else. I can handle a leader I don't agree with, if I believe he or she at least capable of doing the job. It's the primary reason (though far from only one) I have a particular dislike for Trump.

Edited by sgamer82 on Jun 12th 2021 at 8:57:30 AM

That and let face it, not every people vote for EVERY thing, there is this issue in american politics and specially progresive, that you vote for all or nothing agendas and suport one means suport anothers.

And at times this can cause issues, I like some of bernie sander proposal but is somewhat defense of cuba turn me off because is a personal matter for me as venezuelan.

The way I see it, Scott seen to be one of those republicans centrist who want a "agree to disagree" and nothing of what he did is wrong per se: he have is own opinion, he didnt opently atack minorities or privetly for that matter, is just that state of american politics means being neutral become more and more a imposibility.

Even leaving aside the many many many other bugbears I have with those folks that Cawthorn's donated to, I'd just like to know in the year of our Lord 2021 how LGBTQ+phobia/donating to politicians who traffic in LGBTQ+phobia isn't automatically a dealbreaker for fans/even some folks here.

That ranges the gauntlet from people supporting those policies but not being vocal about it, to them deciding that since they're not personally affected by it then it's not a deal breaker.

The most troubling thing here is how Scott said he thought Trump was the best choice for President. I feel like going over why that's a fucking terrible take would take too long, but the idea that someone looked at someone who approved policies of forced sterilization of those in detention, breaking families apart with no plan or intent of ever trying to reunite them, expressed admiration for aurocrats and dictators, abused his position for personal profit, and botched the response to COVID that saw hundreds of thousands of people die to the point of suggesting that people drink bleach and inject radiation into their lungs, and said "yes, this is the best person for the job" is just mind boggling.

Honestly, I was always careful not to place Scott on any sort of pedestal, but this news is still quite disappointing. He clearly doesn't care about or respect his LGBTQ+ fanbase, just their attention and money.

Mostly for superficial reason, trump have the idea of being tough on american enemies and in theory it was(stupid and clueless, but he kinda sorta was) to the point many hong kong people and taiwan flock to him in suport for that.

Now the issue is here: if this a deal breaker for people?, is this means people will thrash him for is ether utter clueless or shitty views? and will people said about is work?.

This is more dificult because a) aparently some people harass him(not surprising, the internet do that). b) unlike other who are very vocal about their shitty views, he was mostly private and is view seen confine to who he vote and what it means and c) unlike other, he seen clearly were is stand and more important what it means for him in long terms, something that rarely, if ever happen.

Edited by unknowing on Jun 12th 2021 at 12:35:32 PM

It would make me reconsider buying any of his products, given how he's used his profits to (intentionally or otherwise) help make the lives of LGBT+ people worse.

Honestly him being right wing was just, Hella suprising to me.

Like, the games are filled to the Brim with Jabs at capitalism. From the Ads to the Company generally being either hilariously incompetent or hilariously corrupt to its CEO being a Psychopathic Mass Child killer.

Him being right wing, let alone to this extent just feels so, Off.

In my case I long ago stop using is product but I did suport is franshine and I admit I held him as a sort of rag to ritches story since he went from "this is my last proyect" to creating this franchinse using stuff like animal animatronic is mind blowing.

No really, you can be right wing and critize capitalism, it just take enough naiveness to think it apply to other and not you, or parody of regular capitalism pratice.

I mean look contrapoints, she is left but she often take shot to the left as hell for being boring, not stylish sense and so on.

What for me is so off is how scott can kept surporting this republican without holding many of their many traits like being a goddamn asshole, that make it kinda baffling for me.

This all makes more sense if you are familiar with the game he released before this series, The Desolate Hope.

"What a lovely little strawman you've made."

Is not a strawman, just badly and somewhat baity made, what frozen wolf is saying there this tendecy of fandom to...for the lack of better world, rewrote their apriaciation for something or whatever merit somethng have because their creator is problematic.

Granted, this happen even before that, george lucas is one notorious example in which the fanbase try to pretty much unperson everything he did to the point they said the good part of star wars were made by someone else or that he did nothing but steal somone else glory, everything because he made the prequels, and is not the only case, one a series or something get enough bad reputation there the idea everythign they did is a negative, or that everyone else who like that thing have to come to term their thing they like is trash and is a guilty pleasure at best or a paid drone at worst.

In general, fandom dosent often how to deal with polemics like this and isnt a easy thing ether.

Tbh it is not remotely surprising that he supports the GOP so strongly.

I think fandom's tendency to unperson problematic creators stems mainly from trying to Take a Third Option between the choices of supporting the problematic creator anyway (an unpleasant option if the creator's unsavory enough) or abandoning the work the fandom loves entirely (another unpleasant option depending on one's attachment to said work).

It only really works when the creator in question isn't actually profiting off the work anymore (i.e Notch with Minecraft), and comes across as incredibly naïve in most other situations.

In this instance, trying to unperson Scott doesn't really work since he still profits off the franchise, but donating significant amounts of money to incredibly anti-LGBTQ+ politicians is pretty bad as far as problematic actions go. It's all such a mess.

Ever since I learned he was intensely christian, I had a small feeling he supported the GOP, but to see that the true extent of it is still quite disappointing.

When that "conservative position" involves trying to take away human rights from others (namely women, minorities, and LGBTQ+ folks), it stops being "just an opinion".

Edited by astrokitty on Jun 12th 2021 at 2:23:33 PM

Is also once of those issue because how ideológical groundwork is today, progresivism is becoming less and less a option between many and becoming more and more as de facto aceptable position, meaning is becoming less aceptable to just have conservative position specially as republican have decide that the answer to that cultural shift is double down on awfulness.

I mean is kinda sorta easy to cancel notch because he was sort of a douche, is harder with Scott because we was very private with his ideas and political lengings and he have being very nice and good with other people.

Well this isn't what I expected from the FNAF thread today.

The only surprise about Scott's political support is that other people are so surprised about it.

Scott ticks every box for the standard Republican voter. He is white, cishet, from a Southern state (Texas in this case), and deeply religious. They spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year appealing to his demographic, in places that already very much believes that voting for any other party is blasphemy. I suppose if you feel charitable about his views you can say he is a single issue voter and otherwise ignorant of their faults. I am not charitable in the least.