Steve Wieck of OneBookShelf.com (the parent of DriveThruRPG) wrote this to publishers, as part of a longer message informing them of their action removing the Gamergate card game from their site:

The title in question is a card game whose theme is the Gamergate issue. The game attempted to present the issue in a satirical manner.

Normally satirical works would be welcome on our marketplaces. However, we feel that there are situations where satire is inappropriate. For example, we do not think that a game released today that satirizes police killings of minorities in the USA would be appropriate. Regardless of how one feels about an issue like that, we feel that it is too current, too emotionally charged on both sides, and too related to real-world violence or death to make it an appropriate matter for satire.

Similarly, no matter how one feels about Gamergate, it is likewise too current, too emotionally fraught, and too related to violence to be an appropriate subject for satire. Additionally, we considered that the violent element of the Gamergate issue has a basis in misogyny. For these reasons, we felt that this card game title was not welcome for sale on our site.

It’s pretty offensive to minorities to compare the actual deaths and real oppression of police killings, and to women to compare the violence that women still face today, with the first-world problems of modern game designers, but I’ll let someone else handle that. Nor is it surprising that this justification is honored more in the breach than as a regular rule (see, for example, the Prison B*tch card game, Schoolyard Bullies, and The Edgy Designer, which appears to take only the anti-gamergate side¹).

The big issue, as a person who writes satire, is what the hell does DriveThruRPG think satire is for if not for current, emotionally-charged issues? Is satire only appropriate for old and bland issues?

Would DriveThruRPG caution Saturday Night Live to ignore current events and examine only issues long past and which everyone already agrees on? That they should ignore modern-day Republicans and Democrats and focus on, say, the Salem witch trials and Tammany Hall? Perhaps not even Tammany Hall; there’s apparently still disagreement on the issue, and certainly the Salem witch trials involved far too much real-world violence and death.

Would they charge The Onion and its focus on current events with inappropriately subjecting real-world violence and death to satire?

When is satire appropriate, if not for important issues currently being debated?