this post was submitted on 14 May 2024

6 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

47237 readers

3343 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

oars (OpenAgeRatingsService) in appdata.xml files: why "sex-homosexuality"? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I can understand why all the other things would be listed here, and I would understand if sexuality in general was considered inappropriate for children, but why homosexuality in particular? This is strange to me.

<content_rating type="oars-1.1">
  <content_attribute id="violence-cartoon">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-fantasy">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-realistic">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-bloodshed">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-sexual">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-desecration">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-slavery">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-worship">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-alcohol">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-narcotics">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-tobacco">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-nudity">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-themes">none</content_attribute>

  <!-- this line here -->
  <content_attribute id="sex-homosexuality">none</content_attribute>

  <content_attribute id="sex-prostitution">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-adultery">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-appearance">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-profanity">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-humor">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-discrimination">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-chat">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-info">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-audio">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-location">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-contacts">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="money-purchasing">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="money-gambling">none</content_attribute>
</content_rating>

EDIT: as one commenter pointed out, an explanation can be found in a commit on the git repo and the tag has been removed.

Rationale
***

Certain attributes in the specification require some explanation as to why they
are present. This list is not exhaustive and may be added to in future.

 * `sex-homosexuality`: As of 2020,
   [various countries](https://www.humandignitytrust.org/lgbt-the-law/map-of-criminalisation/)
   have laws which criminalise lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)
   people. In order for software and content to be distributed in those
   countries without breaking the law, and possible reprisal, it is necessary to
   be able to tag software and content which contains LGBT references, so that
   it can be hidden in those countries.
   However, in other countries (for example, the EU), discrimination laws
   explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender or sexuality. So
   while LGBT tagging may be available in OARS data, consumers of that data must
   only apply it in countries where the law requires that.

It is still strange to me that anyone would add this tag to an age ratings service, if it is a legal issue and not related to age appropriacy. Anyway, thanks for all the answers (except for those who failed to stay civil and/or brought up american politics for no reason).

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Because by law in certain countries, homosexuality is persona non grata, and a filter needs to be there to legally operate in such countries.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Thank you for actually providing an answer to the question, without insulting anyone.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Do these backward shepherds that stone their wives need computers?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I too think that it would be better for everyone if the USA was cut off from technology.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (24 children)

The Republican culture war being waged against the LGBT+ community should make it completely clear that your skin color or brand of religious nonsense doesn't make you immune to bigotry.

load more comments (24 replies)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I dunno, why don't you ask, eg: Russia?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Oh how sweet is the irony of the bigots in this thread, who thinks the tag is there to "free" from them from seeing gay people holding hands and kissing, when it's actually there because bigots have outlawed being gay some places.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Note that in oars git repo itself a lot of tags were removed because of idiots calling it "problematic" https://github.com/hughsie/oars/commit/bbb10186cbecb49252610e5604ed025df8f4c8b7

the actual gitrepo explained why it's neccessary, not wanted

* `sex-homosexuality`: As of 2020,
   [various countries](https://www.humandignitytrust.org/lgbt-the-law/map-of-criminalisation/)
   have laws which criminalise lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)
   people. In order for software and content to be distributed in those
   countries without breaking the law, and possible reprisal, it is necessary to
   be able to tag software and content which contains LGBT references, so that
   it can be hidden in those countries.
   However, in other countries (for example, the EU), discrimination laws
   explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender or sexuality. So
   while LGBT tagging may be available in OARS data, consumers of that data must
   only apply it in countries where the law requires that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

commit message

I'm --><-- close to just deleting OARS completely

Don't threaten us with a good time Hughsie

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I remember filling OARS out for one of my apps. Maybe I'm naive and it's a step needed for mass adoption, but it feels like a solution looking for a problem.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They should have one for heterosexuality, too, if it's all about tastes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

No kidding. So sick of hearing about those people 😙

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

To be honest I'm more concerned by language-humor. Like not even saying what kind of humour, just any type of humour at all. Jokes are for adults only!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Because some people want to filter it out. So it gets a label.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Or filter it in

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Because some bigots want to filter it out.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Excuse me for wanting to filter out heavily homosexual content. If you like it go ahead, I just don't want to see it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I don’t want to see heterosexuals but you don’t see me legislating against you, subtly erasing you, and actively hunting you. So no. You’re not excused, sweet cheeks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

By "heavily homosexual", do you mean pornographic? Because that's a separate tag.

Edit: typo.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

100% she means “anything that’s even remotely close to …THAT shudder”

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

All of these represent various social mores. I'd have no problem with my kids seeing content involving fantasy violence, but I respect that others might object. As a bisexual myself, I have less respect for those who object to their kids seeing homosexuality specifically, but I can tolerate their existence.

For fairness' sake, I wouldn't mind it if heterosexuality were on the list too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think things got lost in translation here. We're not talking about explicit/pornographic content here. There are other tags that cover that. This, however, indicates sexual orientation in general which covers any display of affection that characterizes same gender couples, including kissing, holding hands or be explicitly in a relationship, which is no less appropriate for kids than straight smooching.

Hope that helps

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yes that was clear to me. I was saying that, while I don't find same-sex content objectionable (indeed it makes me happy to see this kind of representation on screen), and I personally think it's something children should be exposed to, many people would disagree. Just like other tags on here which I think children shouldn't be exposed to at a young age but others wouldn't mind. Relative morality.

Politically speaking, I would be happier if those who oppose same-sex relationships were to change their minds. They pose a threat to my life. But FOSS is for everyone, even people I disagree with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Oh yeah, absolutely. It, unfortunately, a reality.

To mine as well, I'm with you on that one.

load more comments