New PCC - Stunticons, Undertow and Salvage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

You'd think they'd learn to do a bit more research into names after the Nexus Maximus affair. :p A simple Google search (with safe mode switched off ;)) probably would've let them know that the word could be offensive in some regions.

---

Again, that would be under the assumption that they had any inkling that it was an offensive word in other regions, and logically, if they did have any inkling, they most likely would have avoided the word entirely.

See where this is going? You've already shown that Hasbro tries to be culturally sensitive when they are aware of a problem. If they didn't know there's a problem, how could they respond to it? Why would they do a google search for a word that, to Americans, seems perfectly reasonable?

Additionally, their lawyers and the US Trademark registration office evidently didn't see a problem with trademarking "spastic" either, further demonstrating that generally Americans have no idea that "spastic" is now considered to be an offensive term in some countries.


Is anybody else going to attempt to argue that they did somehow know that spastic was offensive but were too lazy to double check or simply didn't care? Because that would be a ridiculous argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hursticon

You see, to me, this is very much like the 'Gay' description argument in that whilst someone may use the term, they're more often than not never actually calling a person a Homosexual but saying they're crap - All they are doing is swapping out the word for another, much like the way other profane (I call descriptive ;)) words are used.

---

Yes but the argument is:

Gay = Homosexual (although even that is not the original definition...)

Gay = Crap/Stupid/disapproved


Therefore,

Homosexual = Crap/Stupid/somewhat detestable.


By calling someone gay, in the context you describe, you're not saying that they are gay, but you are saying that they are displaying qualities similar to one who is gay, and the offence is in the association of homosexuals with your friends stupid actions/behaviours.



In this case, the issue in UK and Australia will be the association of the term "Spastic" with one of the evil Decepticon characters, thereby associating those who are medically spastic with characters that are bad/evil. Although a cleverly written bio that discussed his boundless energy (as the Americans use the term) would go some way to alleviate any negative connotations, but not completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

Is anybody else going to attempt to argue that they did somehow know that spastic was offensive but were too lazy to double check or simply didn't care? Because that would be a ridiculous argument.

---

I can't see that anyone has been arguing that. The point is that when they name any toy, they should do a basic Google search to know they're going to avoid another Slapper or Nexus Maximus scenario. It's common sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim Prime

Yes but the argument is:

Gay = Homosexual (although even that is not the original definition...)

Gay = Crap/Stupid/disapproved


Therefore,

Homosexual = Crap/Stupid/somewhat detestable.


By calling someone gay, in the context you describe, you're not saying that they are gay, but you are saying that they are displaying qualities similar to one who is gay, and the offence is in the association of homosexuals with your friends stupid actions/behaviours.

In this case, the issue in UK and Australia will be the association of the term "Spastic" with one of the evil Decepticon characters, thereby associating those who are medically spastic with characters that are bad/evil. Although a cleverly written bio that discussed his boundless energy (as the Americans use the term) would go some way to alleviate any negative connotations, but not completely.

---

I'd actually disagree with that Seraphim, as would one of my mates of 21 years who is a Homosexual.
He himself has told me that people calling each other 'Gay' is not offensive to Homosexuals whatsoever, or at least that's how he and his partner feel, and it is his belief that it is only offensive once you've given it a context.

What you have done is exactly that, you've given 'Gay' the context of Homosexuality and hence associated all the other meanings that the word 'Gay' can have and pinned it to Homosexuals.
You've displayed a clear case of over the top - political correctness, much like the fairy penguins and bah bah black sheep debacle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

See where this is going? You've already shown that Hasbro tries to be culturally sensitive when they are aware of a problem.

---

In one instance. And even then it was completely unnecessary and should never have been done IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

If they didn't know there's a problem, how could they respond to it? Why would they do a google search for a word that, to Americans, seems perfectly reasonable?

---

Apparently they did it for Slag... what gets me here is the seeming contradictory standards from Hasbro. They wanted to avoid using "Slag" in fear of offending people in the UK - even though they really wouldn't have... yet it was fine to use "Night Slash Cheetor," "Slapper" and now "Spastic" without any regard for potential offence.

I'm not saying that Hasbro _should_ care about this sort of thing, because really, in the correct context these words aren't offensive. "Night Slash Cheetor" is called so because he skulks around in the dark slashing people with his swords, not because he likes to go around urinating in late hours. "Slapper" got his name because... erm... he likes to slap people? Or maybe that's the sound he makes when he jumps? (because the original Car Robot name "Gusshar" is the Japanese onomatopoeia for the squishy sound a toad makes when it's stepping about). And yeah, even "Spastic" would be completely acceptable if it's a description of a highly excitable or energetic character. Fine, I get that.

But what I don't get it is how Hasbro wasn't willing to apply the same standards with "Slag." Just as 'spastic' is not an offensive word when used in the context of describing someone hypo (at least in the U.S.), then neither is "Slag" offensive in the context of smelted metal.

See... what gets me isn't so much that they're calling a toy "Spastic." What gets me is that Animated SLAG got totally gipped and was named "Snarl", all for the sake of Hasbro's New-Found International Political Correctness Sensitivity Policy(TM). And now it seems that they've abolished their NFIPCSP in allowing a toy to be called "Spastic." I dunno about yours, but my Animated Snarl is probably gonna be pret-ty Night-Slashed off when I tell him about this. Yup.

But anyway, I think Hasbro's International Division really should think about modifying this toy's name for its non-American Anglophone market.
From wikipedia:
"The word spastic is used differently depending on location which has led to some controversy and misunderstanding..... The word in common speech can also be used in a pejorative context. The level of severity depends on whether one understands it as it is used in the United States or the United Kingdom. In the UK it is considered an offensive way to refer to the disabled..... The current understanding of the word is well-illustrated by a BBC survey in 2003, which found that "spastic" was the second most offensive term in the UK relating to disability (retard was deemed most offensive). In 2007, Lynne Murphy, a linguist at the University of Sussex, described the term as being "one of the most taboo insults to a British ear"."

All they would have to do is print off some stickers with a variant name to stick over the packaging and instruction booklet. It's relatively inexpensive and, IMO, worth the effort in order to protect Hasbro's corporate image/reputation. Also, it might make U.S. completists go nuts and pay premium prices to buy some "foreign exclusive variant"... so maybe local collectors here could buy spares and try to hock them off at inflated prices to Americans. Hehehe... oh, I mean, NO! That's bad... don't do it! :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hursticon

I'd actually disagree with that Seraphim, as would one of my mates of 21 years who is a Homosexual.
He himself has told me that people calling each other 'Gay' is not offensive to Homosexuals whatsoever, or at least that's how he and his partner feel, and it is his belief that it is only offensive once you've given it a context.

---

I agree with Seraphim. The word "gay" when used as a synonym for something undesirable and negative (like "stupid") then makes it offensive because it is implying that gays are undesirable and negative people. Whether gay people personally find it offensive or not doesn't necessarily change that.

From wikipedia:
"When used with a derisive attitude (e.g. "that was so gay"), the word gay is pejorative. While retaining its other meanings, it has also acquired "a widespread current usage" amongst young people, as a general term of disparagement. This pejorative usage has its origins in the late 1970s. Beginning in the 1980s and especially in the late 1990s, the usage as a generic insult became common among young people.

This usage of the word has been criticized as homophobic."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hursticon

What you have done is exactly that, you've given 'Gay' the context of Homosexuality and hence associated all the other meanings that the word 'Gay' can have and pinned it to Homosexuals.

---

I think everyone understands that when people use the word "gay" to describe something in a negative context (e.g. "Spastic is such a gay name"), that they are using it in the context of homosexuals as a synonym for negativity.

I think it's fine to use the word "gay" outside of that context though. For example, some people are now challenging the line from "Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" where it says "How gay your life must be." -- now, to take offense to that is just silly. Obviously they're using the word 'gay' in the context of being happy, and I don't think children should be insulated from it, but simply taught about context - because context is a major part of how languages work.

But having said that, there are some words that, when they become widely taken offensive, that it may be unwise to assign that word to the name of a children's toy. For example, imagine if I made a Transformer character whose tech specs profile describes him as being extremely sociable and a great communicator... so I call him "Intercourse." Contextually I'm using the word in its correct meaning. In reality, I'm probably gonna get complaints from parents. :p ;) A colleague of mine found a school report written around 1900 which described a male student as having "excellent intercourse." The teacher was of course praising his social intercourse... but I reckon if I wrote that now in a student's report, I'd probably end up in a spot of trouble. ;)

This thread is probably several pages longer than it needs to be, and although I don't want to make it go longer, I'm not going to let this pass without comment.

Personally, I wince every time somebody uses the word "gay" in a negative and do find it offensive. It's disappointing that so many people think this sort of casual derogatory language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

I agree with Seraphim. The word "gay" when used as a synonym for something undesirable and negative (like "stupid") then makes it offensive because it is implying that gays are undesirable and negative people. Whether gay people personally find it offensive or not doesn't necessarily change that.

From wikipedia:
"When used with a derisive attitude (e.g. "that was so gay"), the word gay is pejorative. While retaining its other meanings, it has also acquired "a widespread current usage" amongst young people, as a general term of disparagement. This pejorative usage has its origins in the late 1970s. Beginning in the 1980s and especially in the late 1990s, the usage as a generic insult became common among young people.

This usage of the word has been criticized as homophobic."

I think everyone understands that when people use the word "gay" to describe something in a negative context (e.g. "Spastic is such a gay name"), that they are using it in the context of homosexuals as a synonym for negativity.

I think it's fine to use the word "gay" outside of that context though. For example, some people are now challenging the line from "Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" where it says "How gay your life must be." -- now, to take offense to that is just silly. Obviously they're using the word 'gay' in the context of being happy, and I don't think children should be insulated from it, but simply taught about context - because context is a major part of how languages work.

But having said that, there are some words that, when they become widely taken offensive, that it may be unwise to assign that word to the name of a children's toy. For example, imagine if I made a Transformer character whose tech specs profile describes him as being extremely sociable and a great communicator... so I call him "Intercourse." Contextually I'm using the word in its correct meaning. In reality, I'm probably gonna get complaints from parents. :p ;) A colleague of mine found a school report written around 1900 which described a male student as having "excellent intercourse." The teacher was of course praising his social intercourse... but I reckon if I wrote that now in a student's report, I'd probably end up in a spot of trouble. ;)

---

I personally don't understand the argument that a word can still be considered offensive if the people who are supposedly meant to be offended by it, aren't being offended - how does that make sense?

Also I agree that some, if not a lot, of people still use it in a context of negativeness towards Homosexuals - I pity them because obviously they don't know how incredibly normal Homosexuals are, what they choose to do behind closed doors is their own business but I digress.

I'm going to leave it at that because whilst obviously I have differing opinions to others, I don't think this topic of discussion is really in-line with the thread and I don't want to offend anybody any further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulbot

This thread is probably several pages longer than it needs to be, and although I don't want to make it go longer, I'm not going to let this pass without comment.

Personally, I wince every time somebody uses the word "gay" in a negative and do find it offensive. It's disappointing that so many people think this sort of casual derogatory language.

---

I agree Paulbot, as I am a cause and a contributor to that fact so I'm going to discontinue my discussions on the topic of names, as this thread is becoming incredibly derailed and I'm part of the guilty party.

In a vein attempt to swing things back on topic, I think it is a rather odd choice that they've decided to homage Dragstrip as the leader of these 'Stunticons' as I would love to see a new mold in the visage of G1 Motormaster.
(Scourge/Nemesis has stolen all his thunder and simple repaints suck! :mad::p)

I'm not a huge fan of PCCs really, I am curious to see a Manta Ray repaint of the boat though if someone wanted to photoshop one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hursticon

I personally don't understand the argument that a word can still be considered offensive if the people who are supposedly meant to be offended by it, aren't being offended - how does that make sense?

---

because you cant account for 100% of the people in this case. there's bound to be someone offended even if their numbers are minor.

Quote:

---

Also I agree that some, if not a lot, of people still use it in a context of negativeness towards Homosexuals - I pity them because obviously they don't know how incredibly normal Homosexuals are, what they choose to do behind closed doors is their own business but I digress.

---

I would say most people don't grow up around homosexuals which is why it is a difficult topic later in life. I didn't actually know any until after the age of 20+

Quote:

---

I'm going to leave it at that because whilst obviously I have differing opinions to others, I don't think this topic of discussion is really in-line with the thread and I don't want to offend anybody any further.

---

It was an interesting read for me.

Quote:

---

In a vein attempt to swing things back on topic, I think it is a rather odd choice that they've decided to homage Dragstrip as the leader of these 'Stunticons' as I would love to see a new mold in the visage of G1 Motormaster.

---

You could replace him with the huffer repaint - crankcase.

Quote:

---

I'm not a huge fan of PCCs really, I am curious to see a Manta Ray repaint of the boat though if someone wanted to photoshop one?

---

I haven't bought a single PCC at all yet, actually leaving that to family to gift me for christmas

Hasbro's statement about the Transformer product named "Spastic"

When they say no longer for europe, does that include australia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaiden

Hasbro's statement about the Transformer product named "Spastic"

When they say no longer for europe, does that include australia?

---

I thought we were considered part of the Asian market? Isn't that why we're sometimes we're referred to as Australasia? :confused::confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkyWarp91

I thought we were considered part of the Asian market? Isn't that why we're sometimes we're referred to as Australasia? :confused::confused:

---

Not in Hasbro's eyes. Although I think we may count in statistics as Asia-Pacific, we have our own distributor looking after all releases, wave distribution, etc.


Which for the last few years I have been thankful for, after hearing all of the issues the UK folk now have in actually getting any TFs at all.

It's likely we won't get him here as well. Hasbro Australia would know that "Spastic" is a word to not attach to a toy.

guh... simply not selling the toy in markets where the name may potentially offend is a rather short-sighted solution. It would not be that hard or expensive to simply produce stickers with a variant name to apply onto packaging and instruction booklets, surely. Hasbro's done it before with other things, like the Beast Machines Deployers (the back of their cards had a MASSIVE sticker) and of course, all the imported Japanese Masterpiece toys that were sold in Australia (Hasbro placed an English language legal blurb sticker over Takara's). *sigh*

I'd consider getting this toy if I saw it in local stores, but I'm just not enough of a fan of PCCs to bother importing it.

We get US (packaged) stock, but have more ties to the English vernacular than the American one, so Hasbro AUS may decide to just not import the assortment cases with that figure in it.
We'll see in a few months time I guess.

The thing I don't understand is, even if it isn't an offensive word in America, how is it a positive term? The context people have given is still a negative one, even if it is for amusement... it is still has negative connotation for a derogatory purpose.
There is no positive spin you can give to the word Spastic or Spaz in America, because it has no positive meaning... so why use a descriptive word that can't be positively defended?
Stupid Hasbro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffin

Stupid Hasbro.

---

Yep.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/we...6908-22711513/

This was only a matter of time, I agree with Goki that it is a bit of a knee-jerk reaction by canning it's release to offended markets - surely a simple name change would remedy the issue, they do that quite often with TV shows and Movies. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffin

The thing I don't understand is, even if it isn't an offensive word in America, how is it a positive term? The context people have given is still a negative one, even if it is for amusement... it is still has negative connotation for a derogatory purpose.
There is no positive spin you can give to the word Spastic or Spaz in America, because it has no positive meaning... so why use a descriptive word that can't be positively defended?
Stupid Hasbro.

---

You're still being influenced by Australia's british roots. Even in what you're saying here, you're putting an angrier, more damning weight on the word than it has in the US.

In the North America, spastic (or spaz) has a similar weight to nerd, dweeb, doof, or dummy (in other words, the word has very little, if any, derogatory weight), then for them, this mildly negative term being used as a product name wouldn't be a big deal. To them, a spaz is somebody who is hyperactive, random, excitable, ie, Movie Frenzy. You are being driven entirely by your Australian/British-derived understanding of the word.

You guys are frothing yourselves up into personal rage and offense on behalf of other people for an oversight.

Besides, spastic has previously been used in Transformers, modified to sound "more transformery", in the past: Spasma.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hursticon

This was only a matter of time, I agree with Goki that it is a bit of a knee-jerk reaction by canning it's release to offended markets - surely a simple name change would remedy the issue, they do that quite often with TV shows and Movies. :confused:

---

At this late stage, it is likely that the toys are well into production and ready to be shipped. Simply changing the names might mean pulping an entire production run (so far, anyway) of packaging and redoing it for all toys (including any wave/casemates who have Spastic as a cross-sell on the bottom of the packaging), delaying that wave/assortment. It's probably more cost-effective to just restrict that particular assortment to the United States and Canada, where Spastic's name is not a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

At this late stage, it is likely that the toys are well into production and ready to be shipped. Simply changing the names might mean pulping an entire production run (so far, anyway) of packaging and redoing it for all toys (including any wave/casemates who have Spastic as a cross-sell on the bottom of the packaging), delaying that wave/assortment. It's probably more cost-effective to just restrict that particular assortment to the United States and Canada, where Spastic's name is not a problem.

---

Hmm...
Fair point there FFN, maybe Hasbro could offer an exclusive UK/EU deal on their online store for those who want it then perhaps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

You're still being influenced by Australia's british roots. Even in what you're saying here, you're putting an angrier, more damning weight on the word than it has in the US.

---

Well yes... Australian English is more closely related to British English (extended rant here :)). But as griffin said, there doesn't appear to be a positive spin on this word even by US English standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

In the North America, spastic (or spaz) has a similar weight to nerd, dweeb, doof, or dummy (in other words, the word has very little, if any, derogatory weight), then for them, this mildly negative term being used as a product name wouldn't be a big deal. To them, a spaz is somebody who is hyperactive, random, excitable, ie, Movie Frenzy.

---

I don't know if names like "Dweeb," "Dummy," "Nerd" or "Doofus Dorkimus" would sound cool even to American ears. Sure... 'spastic' may not sound as terribly offensive to Americans, but I don't think it sounds terribly 'cool' or 'awesome' either.

As I understand it, Americans consider the word "damn" to be far more taboo than we do. I've been told that Americans won't say this word in front of polite company, or if a child said it in front of an adult they'd be reprimanded for using profanity. But here it's not considered a profanity... but nor is it considered a terribly good word either. It seems the equivalent Australian English word would be "hypo" (e.g. 'Red cordial makes me hypo.') -- to be called hypo may not be as offensive as being called spastic, but a mild insult is still an insult nonetheless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

You guys are frothing yourselves up into personal rage and offense on behalf of other people for an oversight.

---

Because it is an offensive word to us. Yes, it's more offensive in the context of Australian English, but guess what - we're Australians. And Australia is a Hasbro market. Hasbro USA may have completely unintentionally done this - fine, I get that... but it doesn't mean they shouldn't do something about. If you were walking in a public place and you accidentally stepped on a stranger's foot, then you'd apologise right? Sure, you didn't mean to hurt them, but you did, so you are obliged something about it (i.e. say sorry). Likewise Hasbro USA have unintentionally made a lot of people feel upset with the choice of this name, thus they are obliged to do something about it, e.g. withhold sales of this toy in non-North American markets (or better yet, change the names for those markets) -- but they are obliged to do something and not just sit back there and say, "We didn't mean it so get off our backs."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

Besides, spastic has previously been used in Transformers, modified to sound "more transformery", in the past: Spasma.

---

'Spasma' is a combination of 'spasm' and 'asthma' - as in when an asthmatic gets so upset that s/he suffers an asthma attack. But I don't think there's necessarily a pejorative or insulting connotation to that word. Not all words used to describe things are necessarily insulting (and as this episode has taught us, the magnitude of the offense can vary in different regions, apparently in American "wanker" isn't taboo as it is here (there's a Transformers voice actor whose screen name - as it appeared in the credits - was WANKUS - a deliberate cross between 'wanker' and 'doofus')). Also Nebulans are really more like accessories. Apeface was the toy, Spasma was his headmaster accessory.

I'm an asthmatic and I don't find 'spasma' offensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

At this late stage, it is likely that the toys are well into production and ready to be shipped. Simply changing the names might mean pulping an entire production run (so far, anyway) of packaging and redoing it for all toys (including any wave/casemates who have Spastic as a cross-sell on the bottom of the packaging), delaying that wave/assortment. It's probably more cost-effective to just restrict that particular assortment to the United States and Canada, where Spastic's name is not a problem.

---

...or Hasbro Australia could print stickers with a different name to cover up wherever the name "Spastic" appears on the packaging.

As I said before, there have been precedents of where Hasbro has done this before, e.g. on the back of the Beast Machines Deployer cards and the legal blurb stickers on the Australian imported Japanese Masterpiece boxes. IIRC they even have the address and phone number for Hasbro Australia (I never bought any of them so I'm going off memory). It would be relatively cheap for Hasbro AU to make these stickers and it would allow them to sell the product here without fear of a public backlash (cos can you imagine any parent of a disabled child walking into a toy aisle and seeing a toy on a shelf with a name like "Spastic"??).

Not selling it here would be an option too, but feels more of a cop-out to me. IMO if Hasbro really wanted to try and make this toy work in our market (and other non-American Anglophone markets), then they would consider other alternatives like just making those stickers. Stickers would mean they wouldn't need to actually repackage any of the toys (just as our Deployers and Japanese Masterpieces were never repackaged - hell, other than the legal blurb sticker almost all the text on our imported MPs here were in Japanese!).

errrr, what happens when people peel off the stickers??? It'll still have "Spastic" behind it and then people will still be insulted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFN

You're still being influenced by Australia's british roots. Even in what you're saying here, you're putting an angrier, more damning weight on the word than it has in the US.

In the North America, spastic (or spaz) has a similar weight to nerd, dweeb, doof, or dummy (in other words, the word has very little, if any, derogatory weight), then for them, this mildly negative term being used as a product name wouldn't be a big deal. To them, a spaz is somebody who is hyperactive, random, excitable, ie, Movie Frenzy. You are being driven entirely by your Australian/British-derived understanding of the word.

You guys are frothing yourselves up into personal rage and offense on behalf of other people for an oversight.

---

I don't think I was being hostile or agressive in my post, I was simply observing that every example or explination given so far has not had a positive connotation to it. No one has been able to give a positive useage of the term, in any form. Even you yourself admit that it is 'mildly negative'... so if there is no positive useage of the term, my question still stands - why use it? Especially if there are easier alternatives, like homages (why not call it Dragstrip?).
Give an example where calling someone spastic or spaz in american vernacular, has a postive, friendly, supportive or even inspiring meaning.
Mildly or not, it is still used as a derogatory, insulting, chastising word. There is no non-negative use for that word in America, it's just not considered to be 'as bad' as other countries.

I'm certainly not advocating making a fuss about it like English fans have, but I'm definitely questioning the reasoning behind using a descriptive word that is insulting in all countries (mildly in America, majorly in England).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christalcase

errrr, what happens when people peel off the stickers??? It'll still have "Spastic" behind it and then people will still be insulted

---

They'd probably tear the cardboard. But even if they peeled it really carefully, that's not Hasbro's fault - that's the customer's fault. Hasbro have taken reasonable measures to cover up the potentially offending name. The toy was initially designed/intended for an American market, but Hasbro would have taken reasonable measures to adjust the name for an Australian market. If someone were to go an undo this, then that's not Hasbro's fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffin

Especially if there are easier alternatives, like homages (why not call it Dragstrip?)

---

And that's the name that should appear on the stickers!

How cool would it be (for us) if this toy was called "Spastic" in North America, but then in other Anglophone countries it was called Drag Strip! :D

New images of Salvage and Undertow

http://www.seibertron.com/transforme...aterlog/20293/