Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed, Will Return Sans Costumes

Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed, Will Return Sans Costumes

February 26, 2009

A costumed protest scheduled to take place at the South Australian Parliament next week has been cancelled, according to its organizer.

As GamePolitics reported recently, Cosplay For a Cause was meant to draw attention to South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson's ongoing efforts to block the establishment of an R18+ rating for games in the Australian market.

Retailer Gametraders, which was behind the event, said that a low expected turnout - likely due to the cosplay aspect - triggered the cancellation. The company expects to reschedule the rally without the requirement to suit up in costume. Gametraders exec Chad Polley said:

We have received an overwhelming amount of support from the public on our drive to have an R18+ rating introduced in Australia, especially with our latest drive. We have listened to our customers and to the numerous forum postings and have taken into account new ideas on how to get our message across.

For action to be taken on the discussion we need the support of the media to push awareness of the issue and put it on the political agenda. We will start with having our Managing Director present the petitions at Adelaide’s Parliament House, followed by a press conference.

GP: Better... With Aussie gamers working hard to get their government to take them seriously, a cosplay event seems rather ill-advised.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

Whew, now that I am glad. Maybe now that they'll reorganize the protest without ridiculous costumes, more people will come and be treated more seriously

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

Well, good thing they realized that there was error instead of continuing on with it. Now I just hope it it a successful protest.

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

I am so glad they ditched the costumes. Now hopefully they can get the protest reorganized and executed.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

Lets be honest, cosplayers are just downright weird.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

doesn't mean they can't be funny. BOOT TO THE HEAD

岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is Scrubbed,

Thank god they actually realized this!!!

The cosplay march seemed like a really stupid idea...

 

hopefully they will now get a serious and effective march going...

Re: Cosplay Rally Planned for Aussie Parliament is ...

Man, actually protesting in cosplay was one of the stupidest ideas ever. Whoever thought of it in the first place should be firmly slapped.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 02/09/10 at 01:18pm
Valdearg: I do agree that it shouldn't be legal. That's for sure.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:14pm
Valdearg: @AE: Doubtful. Again, it's perfectly legal.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Login or register to post shouts