This post is meant to open a dialogue on how this subreddit manages the conversation around Penny’s 2♥ scene.
We invite all members of the community to read through this post, but ask that comments and conversation center the question of moderation and not interpretation of the scene.
The scene
-
George is in front of his mailbox.
-
George: *Sigh*… How am I going to reach that letter in the back?
-
Penny is walking by. She notices George sitting in front of his mailbox, runs over.
-
Penny: Here, let me help you, Mr. Mullner!
-
Penny goes around George to the back of his wheelchair and gives it a push; he rolls several feet away from her while she stays in place. She grabs the letter.
-
Penny: There you go!
-
George: Hmmph. I could’ve done it myself! And I can certainly move around on my own! How feeble do you think I am?
-
The farmer enters.
-
Penny: [Farmer]? You were watching us?
-
I was. You did a kind thing there, Penny. (+50 friendship)
-
I was. You should’ve asked instead of assuming George wanted help. (-50 friendship)
-
I’m just taking a walk, minding my own business. (No effect on friendship)
-
George: *sigh*…No, no… I’m sorry, miss. I shouldn’t have gotten so angry. It was actually very kind of you to help me out.
-
Penny: That’s ok, Mr. Mullner. I understand.
-
George leaves, goes into his house.
-
Penny: It must be difficult to grow old…
Readings
This scene comes up often on . Every time it does, people are harmed—particularly those with disabilities.
Let's address a few things.
|
|
|
|
|
Personhood
|
Moving a person's wheelchair without their consent is a violation of their bodily autonomy, comparable to picking up a person and placing them elsewhere. Her action arises from a set of cultural norms that views disabled people as "less than" or incapable—which then extends into a violation of personhood. In this way, Penny's action is ableist.
|
|
Intention
|
Penny's intention is good. She means to help. She is not bigoted, or hateful, and certainly not consciously biased against George.
|
|
Gameplay (1)
|
The gameplay awards friendship points for reinforcing her actions. It depletes friendship points for identifying what she did as wrong and offering alternative action, i.e.: telling her she should have asked instead of assuming George wanted help. The friendship mechanic suggests that supporting an ableist action is the "right" answer, and correcting it is "wrong." This is frustrating.
|
|
Gameplay (2)
|
Friendship points are yoked to the individual character. It is defensible to view the points not as a reflection of what is morally right, but how that character feels. Penny feels bad at being corrected, and her friendship with you falls.
|
|
Apologies
|
George apologizes to Penny. Again, this is frustrating, because the conclusion of the scene leans towards framing him as the one who wronged Penny, rather than the other way around. Notably, the only way that Penny apologizes to George is when you correct her.
|
|
Is Penny ableist?
|
She is not hateful or bigoted. No, Penny is not inherently ableist. But yes, her action was ableist. And yes, the story/gameplay seems to support that action more than it corrects it.
|
All this coexists. None of these points are in contradiction.
Moderation
We last made an , about the validity of having issues with representation in Stardew Valley.
We want to assert the following as valid concerns:
-
People of color are distinctly underrepresented in the valley. Art and modding projects that re-imagine white characters as PoC are welcome here.
-
Non-binary players are unable to fully play as themselves. The game mechanically requires you to choose between male and female, and genders you in dialogue, mail, billboard postings, and swimgear.
-
Re: Penny's 2-heart event, many people with disabilities consider it deeply violating to move someone's wheelchair.
Historically, we try to offer modcomments (examples: , , ) and actively mod ableist comments. The thing is, the subject comes up all too often now. Penny’s 2♥ has become a regular topic, inevitably and repeatedly sparking crowded debates and retaliatory posts that, unfortunately, tend to sidestep nuance.
Right now, we want to open a conversation with members of this community who have disabilities.
We know you’re tired. What are your thoughts on how this should be handled, going forward?
A few possible options:
-
Make Penny's 2♥ a : disallow any posts and any comment chains about it completely.
-
Increase the rigor and application of repost policy under : allow the topic, but redirect any similar or responding submissions to the comments of the "original post" for 3 months.
-
"Responding" posts might be a screenshot titled I don't care what people think of her, I just married Penny!
-
We can adjust the 3 month period, of course.
-
Continue as is with modcomments and comment removals, and try to educate people about ableism.
-
Other options? The floor is open.
This isn’t a poll based on hard numbers, but an open forum where we’re hoping that people with disabilities will weigh in. Able bodied people are welcome to contribute to the conversation, but please treat this as a space to elevate and listen to the voices of disabled players. We’ll listen and try to form our policy from there.
Note: Ableism of any stripe—including dismissing concerns around this scene as a real issue—will not be tolerated.
