Weirdest gaming story I’ve heard this year
A gay, deaf, muslim that didn’t have a tumblr account? Huge red flag.
Well this certainly sums up 2024, doesn’t? Everythings made up, and the points don’t matter.
Within months of Craven’s introduction of Banks, Craven claimed Banks had been hospitalized after dropping a KitchenAid mixer on her foot, according to both an anonymous former business associate of Craven’s I spoke to, and my own past conversations with Craven. Several hours later, her leg was allegedly amputated, and nearly 48 hours after the first operation, her other leg was amputated as well.
How did nobody realize this person was lying or fake? Double amputation from a broken foot?
It can happen if there’s an infection. Or a blood clot could end up in the other leg.
Also a gay muslim lol. Pretty sure being a muslim forbids that by default.
I mean, Christianity kinda does, too, but gay Christians definitely exist. Islam and its interpretations/practices aren’t monolithic.
That’s not to say that I think she actually exists - all evidence seems to point to Coty Craven being a con artist - but “gay muslim” isn’t necessarily a red flag.
Religion is often not a choice. For example you are gay, and also born in a muslim house, maybe your famiky decided that you are more important to them then the homophobia, and so, you are gay and a muslim because nothing pushed you to detach from your default religion.
The ignorance you display here is just depressing.
Lemmy’s ignorance about the basics of the islamic religion is even more depressing. It would be easier if everyone who replied just admit they like the idea of gay muslims because it sounds progressive when A) Islam is a lot stricter than most sects of christianity and has not changed over the years and B) As a muslim you can’t pick and choose which rules to follow. With homosexuality explicitly banned, you can’t call yourself muslim as a gay person. In islamic countries you’d probably be jailed for publicly admitting you’re gay.
But go on, tell me I’m ignorant when I actually live in the middle east and actually know what I’m talking about. I wasn’t going to bother replying because I don’t care, but the amount of “umm actshually” replies is annoying.
You are getting replies because you are posting opinions that don’t hold up in the real world. As a former Catholic I know from first hand experience the crisis of identity that occurs when your personally held beliefs start to clash with your local culture and the doctrine of the religion you gew up with. It is not surprising (hence the effectiveness of this con) for someone to still identify as a member of a religion that explicitly rejects their belief system.
I grew up thinking that the LGBTQ community were lost souls who faced damnation if they did not remain chaste (official doctrine), which of course led to deep prejudices resulting from this “othering” of queer people (Catholic community culture). For years after I began to disagree with the official doctrine and recognize my prejudices, I still identified myself as Catholic. For those who grow up in religious environments the religion becomes an integral part of your identity growing up, and it is not easy to let that go.
My personal experience is that I still felt hope that the Catholic Church’s doctrine could be changed, and that my participation in the community could help bring that about. It took a long time to realize this was a lost cause, and that reconciling my internal conflict required real action. Telling my parents I was no longer Catholic was one of the hardest things I ever did, and I am no longer close with them.
So, to sum it up: someone who identifies as both gay and Muslim should not be an object of ridicule by default. Everyone’s experience with religion is different. I hope this gives you a new perspective; sometimes things are not as simple as they seem. The article describes a pretty impressive con job, which was realistic enough to last for years…
Wild fucking read. Was thinking maybe his first girlfriend was using a pseudonym (Turkish-born named Susan Banks?), but conveniently no one has met all 3 of his activist girlfriends. The last bit about the guy deleting all his social media posts AND his last “girlfriend” doing the same after IGN reached out is glaringly suspicious.
This story is just wild. This man killed off three supposed women in a close knit community and disappeared a third and nobody thought to look into it? Seems like the people who hired the PI should have at least reported him for fraud. Interesting that his name is Craven.
Wow that was a great piece of journalism. Seeing it all aggregated like that I don’t think there can be any doubt that this guy was full of shit, even if what he was doing could be argued to be positive. He used marginalized communities to enrich himself, even if what he made had value, and that is just such a sad and horrible way to get there.
Why did he even feel the need to do so if he had something valuable to give back? This whole thing honestly makes me think of some catfish episodes over the years. The ones where people create such a complex web of fake profiles and don’t know how to stop.
Maybe the real accessibility advocacy was the friends we made along the way.
(Copying my own comment from the beehaw post)
Blimey, and they say IGN only does 9/10 reviews nowadays! Fascinating article, very keen to hear if it develops any further.
What was this guy’s motivation? Playing the long game to get rich selling his kick-started ventures? Just for the glory of everyone telling him how great he is? Real altruism in a really weird way? Did he actually help improve accessibility enough in games for the ends to justify the means?
Hard to really say, but I would venture that the best way to tell was from what he did with the attention.
I doubt it’s as simple as ‘He did it for the money’ or ‘He did it for the clicks’ etc. I’m guessing he did it for all the attention/money/influence it got him. I think as we confront a world where AI can be used to fabricate people with incredible ease, the lesson is that people need to occasionally meet in person if we want to guarantee that they have a physical personhood.
