On Gaymers and Cons Pages PREV 1 . . . 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 . . . 23 NEXT | |
No, you came up with a list of how there are properties containing hetrosexuality. How are you hard done by by the existance of these things? Again this is like demanding that there be an atheist gamer convention because obviously games are all slated towards theists, since titles like god of war exist. Its silly. i know its silly, you know it silly: Lets all stop being silly.
I'm going to let you in on an even bigger secret: Your talking bullshit. I'm kidding of course... Thats no secret. Again your statment is the same as if i said "religion sells games like god of war." Lets pretend that i am adamnetly opposed to religion to the point where i am offended by even fictional religions (though to be fair they are all fictional): The existance of God of War doesn't say anything about the entirety of games. Likewise the fact that some games are in fact sold on the principle of sexyness, doesn't mean all games are, or even most games. An just because you don't like games sold using hetrosexual sexyness, there is no reason why those games shouldn't exist. But this has nothing to do with sexuality of the player. Sexuality doesn't come into it at all. Can i suddenly not enjoy playing a lesbian femshep because i'm straight & male? Of course i can. Learn to moderate your own viewing... An frannkly that does not require a gay gamer convention, any more then my dislike of sports game requires a no-sports-game gamer convention.
Bullshit. Because Kratos is buff and shirtless because the are trying to downplay his buffness. In that case, i've got a bridge i'd like to sell you.
Except for when they are not... Which is often
When it happens which is not often & when it is its usually an optional plot thread & quite often the choice is given to romance a member of the same gender.
Except for where they are not, which is often. But even if everything you said was true, which it wasn't, they still doesn't require a gay game convention. At the end of the day a gay gamer convention is absent of justification. We already have game conventions open to everyone, including men, women, hetrosexuals, homosexual, furries & annyoing otaku people you want to smack in the head for walking around butchering pigeon japanese because they think it makes them cool. An frankly it smacks of a serious double standard: For years people have complained about geeks not being inclusive (even though we've always been inclusive) & then this kind of crap pops up. Lame. This is the same nonsense we got when women complained that men were keeping them out of convention events, that it was some sort of boys club & then they turned around and created all female cliques like the Frag Dolls. So totally lame. | |
We live in 21st century, I still do not understand why it is relevant or important to separate people by their sexuality. Well... Maybe the next step of social-evolution has to wait another millennium or till OUR Sun runs out of hydrogen. But being A-sex gives me the great opportunity to attend both "kinds" of conventions and not feeling displaced. Oh wait. I am not straight or gay/bi. Should I demand my own con now? Do I not belong to the other kinds? To be honest, if boys want to have "no girls club". Or in this case "Only gay/bi/insert here" club - GO AHEAD. You do not need to attend these events. This all boils down to... YOU DO NOT NEED TO ATTEND THESE EVENTS - so whats the issue? You stop trowing rocks at them and they will stop trowing rocks at you. Simple ain't it. (I wish - there are always "those people") But if they want to have Con of their own and pay for it them self's - whats the issue? It is their choice. If they don't want to attend cons which they fell are not for them. (And I kinda agree with them - all the big breasted skinny clothed booth babes annoy me a lot. It is con for gaming what does skinny clothed girls have to do with it?!) This boils down before burning as a black stain on the pot in to - live and let live. | |
I agree completely, anyone actually complaining about a gay con for gamers is making a mountain out of a molehill. Think it's silly, redundant and segregational, and that there shouldn't be a need for it? Welcome to cons in general. You may as well ask why gamers should have cons at all, and you'd have pretty much the same arguments. | |
I answered this only 7 posts above your post so I'll quote myself rather than repeat myself.
| |
I am going to put it this way, since you continue to act dismissively instead of respectfully: you have no idea what you're talking about. You speak as if you were some sort of higher authority who possesses the ultimate truth on this matter, when you're not even part of the group who has observed this problem. Allow me to repeat it, so that it sinks in: you have no idea what you're talking about. You're just saying it's silly because it's a subject you have no knowledge of and still manage to find it in your heart to spend time and effort trying to pretend you do, and patronising the people who actually know what they're talking about.
Let me once again contain the innate outburst of rage I had when reading this, and allow me to reply calmly and rationally: comparing sexuality to religion is absolutely ridiculous. Just because some games use religion in their world-building doesn't mean that religion is widely considered to be a selling point for games. At no point the selling point of God of War is its religion! The selling point of God of War is a power fantasy of violence and gore, using a male avatar (Kratos). What you refuse to get is that even though religion is part of the game industry, it's not a selling point. In fact, Extra Credits has done two episodes explaining how the industry is more or less decent using the lore of pre-existant religions, but is sorely lacking when it comes to dealing with actual faith. Its treatment of religion is exclusively background world-building, not something meant to appeal to gamers. The only game that uses religion as a selling point (that I know of) is Left Behind: Eternal Forces, though I'm quite sure that there are only a handful more at best.
It's not "some games", not all games need to be DoA to use sexuality as a selling point. They don't need to shove sexuality in your face to include it as a selling point. Every Tomb Raider game has had sexuality as part of its selling point, as well as fighting games, fantasy RPGs, sci fi games, and any game where you see women showing ass, cleavage or legs for no discernible reason. Which are actually a great deal. Mass Effect has the asari for this (why does Benezia need such an excessive cleavage, for example?), Dragon Age has Morrigan (and Flemmeth, in the sequel), we have Bayonetta, the Hitman assassin-nuns, the female LoL champions, the depiction of women in WoW (and the rest of the Warcraft franchise, where only women have the power to charm or seduce, for example, and are in stereotypically revealing outfits), all the stripperriffic armour for female heroines in fantasy RPGs (I've been told there's a skin for a female LoL champion whose teleport animation is a pole stripper dance), the fact that in most world-building, women embody the concept of seduction (such as that lesser evil in Diablo 3), Kerrigan has built-in stiletto heels and gets turned into a naked female human, female ghosts in Starcraft have body-hugging catsuits and no helmet (to show off their hair and cleavage), the body type of women in fighting games (and practically all games) is "supermodel" with almost no variation (there are practically no fat, muscled, or flat-chested women, and most of them are dressed in outfits that show off their body), Resident Evil has Ada Wong wearing a terribly inappropriate outfit, Claire Redfield showing midriff, Jill Valentine showing cleavage and so on (while the men wear sensible outfits), prostitutes and strippers in games are almost universally female (even in fantasy/sci fi/alternate Earth universes), desire demons in Dragon Age appear to be universally female, and clearly female (not androgynous or hermaphroditic), not to mention almost completely naked, female asari banshees have inexplicable cleavage/increased bust size, Skyrim has mobs that are clearly feminised (hargraven, flame elementals, spriggan, wispmothers and so on) with no male equivalent, half of which are creatures that by logic should have no gender at all, you only rescue women in the Dead to Rights games (stripper minigame!), everything about the Duke Nukem games, the God of War games (with the sexualisation of female monsters and goddesses), Halo's Cortana (and the female-looking aliens), Overlord 1 and 2 (including the harem of women), most of the things that have been described as "fan service" (very rarely is fan service aimed at women or non-straight men)... Need. I. Go. On.
You do not have a rational grasp on what sexuality means. Nobody's saying that you cannot enjoy playing a character of a different sexuality than yours. If that was the case, there wouldn't be any LGBT gamers at all because most characters are straight. What this con is saying is that we exist too and making characters of diverse sexualities (and being more egalitarian with the depiction of sexuality in games) is financially justifiable. Sports are not a marketing selling point for games (other than sports games). No game (other than sports games) constantly shove sports in your face. No game has their characters comment on sports all the time. No game has characters inexplicably dressed in sports outfits for no discernible reason.
Do you get good looks of his ass? Do we get bulge emphasis? Do we even get a clear look of his body? No, because he's wearing a kilt (or long loincloth) and he's covered in ash and warpaint. This is sexualised dude armour, not Kratos's mere shirtlessness:
Oh? Do tell! Because I'm quite sure I can come up with 3 or 4 games (or more, even) with a white male protagonist for every protagonist of colour you can find.
Wow. So games never mention that a male character has a wife, girlfriend or imply that they slept with a woman? Because I recall one of the Gears of War games (according to Yahtzee) had a murdered wife. Because I assure you, there are many games that outright state your male character has a wife (Alan Wake), has a girlfriend (Catherine), a lover (the Prince of Persia series), casual sex with women (the GTA series), or simply flirts with women (the Devil May Cry series).
This one actually made me laugh. Same deal with the protagonist of colour above. I will find you at least five games that highly sexualise women and put them in revealing outfits for each and every single one that you can name that doesn't (and in some cases, like Mass Effect, I will use the same game as an example, because just because Shepard can have a full body-covering suit doesn't mean there aren't half-naked asari in that game!).
Nobody's saying that this con exists because we're not allowed to go to regular cons. This con exists because the industry is convinced we don't exist. It might also have to do with the general homophobia of the industry and the desire to have a safe space to meet where that homophobia doesn't exist.
Let me make this as clear as possible: you don't get to decide what is or is not inclusive. If you're part of the majority or privileged group, you are automatically included. That means that the only people who can actually TELL if something is or is not inclusive are the ones that are part of the minorities or oppressed groups. The only way you have of telling if gamer culture is inclusive or not is listening to those who aren't white straight males. They are the ones who know if gamer culture is inclusive or not.
... Yes. Yes, I do wonder whatever possessed women who repeatedly complained that they felt excluded to form a space where they didn't feel excluded. Boggles the mind. | |
How many marginalised groups need to tell you that your cons and your culture are exclusionary and not safe-places for minorities before you'll consider that the problem might not be with the minorities? EDIT:
Damnit, beaten to it. :) | |
*looks at a comic comparing Communist oppression of a section of religious central Asians (an entire country too btw) to a straight person asking why gays are so insecure that they have to give into tribalism and section off their own little meet up against a culture they're supposedly trying to gain acceptance into.* Sigh... Also ridiculous was the last panel demonstrating a supposed male centric desire that absolutely no male in existence has ever expressed before said panel. But hey, most of The Escapist is full of Misandry. So keep on keepin' on you sexist diamonds. | |
This is totally tangental, but there actually is a group called "Godless Gamers" which is starting to hold meetups in Austin. | |
Hey do any of you guys know of videogames that feature openly (i.e. not implied ala Marcus/Dom shipping) gay protagonists? I honestly cant think of one Ive played and it bothers me | |
Not in the sense of a gay-by-default character, the closest examples I can think of are custom protagonists where you can choose for them to be gay at various points in the plot, a la Mass Effect / Dragon Age. I can't think of a protagonist that was simply gay as part of their innate character, though I'm loathe to suggest that it's the result of intentional discrimination. I think the gaming industry just knows their target audience enough not to risk it. | |
You can field the next one. :P
Fable, Skyrim, Mass Effect and Dragon Age let you play a straight, bisexual, gay or asexual character. Other than that, you have this list: LGBT Characters In Games, though there is sadly a great dearth of protagonists in that list. | |
An i disagree with that too, on exactly the same grounds as why i disagree with the having a gay gamer convention. Because it is completely without justification... Because just like sexuality or gender, gaming is not about religious affiliations. Instead of actually being inclusive, thats just segregation for segregations sake. Whats next, black gaming conventions? white heterosexual men who still live with their parents & have an unrequited crush on the best female friend you had in highschool, even though she thinks of you just as a friend so you keep on "being there" for her, instead of getting on with your own life, gaming conventions? i mean where does it end? After all, isn't the point of gaming.... Well, games? An since gay =/= gay men, but actually equals gay men & women, an if we've agreed that sex sells (to everyone); then by extension wouldn't the lesbians want to be sold the sexy female characters & the gay men sold the sexy male characters, how is that at all different then selling those same characters to a hetrosexual crowd? An again we come round full circle to this event pretty much being devoid of any justification for having a seperate convention... since the justification for a gaming convention is games & games are devoid of implicit sexuality. | |
By that metric why have a gaming convention at all when you could just go to a pop-culture convention? | |
It's different because it's not happening for two of the three groups that you list, gay men and lesbian women. Games are marketed overwhelmingly (to put it mildly) to a straight male audience. I'm a woman and I like women, but I am keenly aware that the people who are making video games are not thinking of me when they dress the scenery with lots of attractive women. I cannot pretend that I'm the target audience when Miranda Lawson in Mass Effect 2 is introduced to me ass-first. There's a cinematic concept called male gaze, which is the understood implication that such camera angles which pan lovingly along the body features of beautiful women are implying that the camera (as a surrogate for the audience) is looking at the subject matter the way they expect a straight man would. I too need gaymer con. | |
Having personally experienced each and every example you listed there (admittedly while at school, which I would argue is worse as at least with a convention or gaming you have a choice as to whether you wish to participate!), I rather disagree with you. Daily, weekly, I received plenty of crap just because of how I was born - so in this regard I have a lot of empathy. Do you know how much bullshit I had to put up with, thanks to that episode of South Park? Perhaps redheads are left alone where you come from, but where I was a kid - and still in the UK today - redheads get a hard time for something as banal as the colour of their hair. If they'd held gaming conventions 15-20 years ago where I was a kid, sure, I'd worry about everything you listed. Well, no, I never worried about it even though the threat was real - I just never let it bother me. EDIT: Just read this in the paper now: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2258343/Mans-jaw-broken-attack-Birmingham-pizza-shop-red-hair.html | |
How? If you mean they contain attractive women, how is that marketing to to straight males, after all lesbian women enjoying looking at attractive women.
And? Thats like me purchasing a car. Is it any the less a car if the company making the car & the salesman selling the car didn't have me in mind when the car was created? Of course not.
There sure is & its being proven to be complete bullshit. Turns out that its used just as often on male characters. Not that it matters in this case since a panning hsot of a female characters arse is as likely to be to the liking of a lesbian as much as it is a hetrosexual guy.
I wish i could get into my photo bucket, because i've actually got one that shows this concept to be silly. Its one from DCU online where as i'm talking to Hal Jordan for the first time, the camera spends the entire time looking at Hals arse. EDIT: I finally got into my photobucket account, so here is the image
| |
I can't get into it, not without inviting a ban. The red mist is already descending. I'm out. | |
You seriously can't tell the difference betwen a game containing an idea and that idea being used to market the game? A lot of games contain violence but it's games like Manhunt that use that violence to sell. God of War (that series where you literally kill gods) is not being marketed to please some desire for more religion in games.
Start listing names of LGBT player characters in video games, see how long it takes you to run out. Now start listing white, heterosexual male leads. Now make a list, Non-sexualised female player characters and sexualised female player characters.
And here it is, no one's trying to take your toys away. No one said those games shouldn't exist, they just want some aimed at them.
Yes, but you always get to be represented in games. LGBT people don't.
The point of this con is to provide a judgement free are for LGBT people, have panels discussing LGBT issues in gaming and show that the LGBT market is worth considering.
Which would actually be a realistic comparison if the industry was almost entirely sports games.
If you think Kratos is meant to be sexualised you understand gay people even less than I thought. "Buffness" is appealing to male power fantasy, not anyone's sexuality.
You're being willfully ignorant if you think all minority player characters combined even comes close to white hetero male player characters.
Have you only ever played western RPGs? In games where you don't control the plot this isn't the case.Many main characters have wives, girlfriends or flirt with another chracter or fall in love with another character. But the only games I can think of that let me be in a same sex relationships are ones where I'm creating and roleplaying my character (and even then not all of them).
Except none of them have a focus on LGBT issues. Would you be happier if people wanted more LGBT focused panels and discussion at regular cons? | |
Don't get angry, get smart. Stop for a second & perform a few seconds of introspection: Are you getting angry because you think i'm saying something bigoted, or are you getting angry because you've realised i'm not saying something bigoted: That what i'm saying has some credence to it. | |
Personally I think we should spend less time forming exclusive groups within the gaming community and making the entire medium more inclusive to everyone. While I don't understand why these people want their own Con, they are more then welcome to do so. I don't think it actually does much to further their goal of being included, when all their really doing is excluding others. I'd rather we don't start forming cliques based on sexuality, race, religion, or anything else. It just splinters us and gives people a reason to say, "Well they have THEIR group, so WE'RE going to make OUR group." But, in the end I doubt having their Gaymer-Con will do any bad. So it doesn't really matter if it's around or not. | |
I agree, but i think we've actually got about as inclusive as its possible to get. There is pretty much something for every taste these days... An if any persons specific kink is not present, i'm sure some japanese developers have created something for you. ;)
Same reason people do anything: Ego. | |
If you play a videogame with someone, they don't know your sexuality. Hell, if you don't use voice chat online they don't even know your gender. However, if you play in such a competitive and immature environment such as XBL, people are going to call you bad words. It really doesn't matter what you are, they'll find some way to offend you and make it stick. The same way that people will say they slept with your mother last night, of course they fucking didn't, but people get defensive of their mothers and take offense. This person is trying to offend you, no matter what your sexuality. It just so happens "faggot" is a great way to cause offense.
Take "bastard". Literally it means a child who's parents weren't married when they were conceived. This was bad back in the day when sex outside of marriage was considered a cardinal sin and the resulting bastards would be cursed. Nowadays, children outside of marriage are pretty commonplace, there's no longer the same social stigma attached to the concept. However "bastard" is still a general pejorative term and is still considered a pretty serious swear word. This is because people associate it now with offense rather than it's original meaning. Same with "faggot", originally targeted towards gay people when homosexuality was not tolerated whatsoever, with the changing social climate and homosexuality becoming more and more accepted by society, it's losing it's impact as "gay = bad" and is instead being used because people associate it with offense.
Sorry, but you're not. In such an unstable market no one is going to take the risk of overtly appealing to the "gay gamer" demographic. What do you even want from videogames to make it appeal to homosexuals? Beyond some homosexual relationships in RPGs, what exactly is it that makes videogames to alienating to gays?
I don't really think you can compare yourselves to poor people in the economy. Poor people are directly linked to the economy, homosexuals just aren't the primary target market for videogames because they're too much of a niche market.
Ignoring the statement "The biological components of masculinity (muscle mass, body hair, height and so on) have been proven, time and again, to be completely independent from sexual attraction." (which is probably why fat, hairy midgets are so popular with the ladies), of course it's a cultural and social construct born out of homophobia. That doesn't make it any less offensive when you're called it.
Stereotypes. Duh.
Don't really see the point of avoiding obscenities and then saying that you wanted to use them. Seems to negate the effort. | |
Way to be massively patronising, dude. Novaova wasn't necessarily getting angry because what you said was massively bigoted. It could be that it was just a load of bullshit. One ass shot doesn't a trend make, man. And the point being made isn't that the use of the male gaze[1] doesn't inadvertently benefit non-straight people that like women, but that its use is a way of illustrating easily one of the many ways in which Gaming culture is constructed with only straight men in mind. [1] which is not bullshit, and I'd seriously love to see what evidence you could possibly have for that | |
I see this as I see many topics of this type, and its a very simple concept. If the only outcome is people being happy, why the hell not? Us in the straight population lose nothing, and there is zero harm in them having their own con. Thats it. Live and let live. Can you dig it? | |
Didn't mind your post up until the last bit, where you fall into a gaping hole created by the writers of this comic:
Supposedly, neither do these "Gaymer" cons. As pitched, it's literally just a con intended for people who are gay. It's supposedly no different in structure or format than the regular cons, and there's nobody checking you at the door to make sure you're gay or not. And if that's the case, then yes, it's 100% valid to ask "why are we segregating ourselves as gamers?". Because while the individuals in question (and the comic writers) insist that it's a measure purely intended to give them a place where they "fit in", it seems the only actual point of these separate conventions is to emphasize how the attendees are different from regular gamers....it's placing emphasis on their sexuality rather than their status as members of the gaming community. That's not trying to fit a place to "fit in", that's trying to stand out and draw attention to yourselves. And that's perfectly fine if you want to do that, but then if someone points that fact out, you don't get to pretend that the person pointing this out is ALWAYS a bigot. No one's saying they can't have their own con. We're asking what makes it different from all of the others....and if the answer is really "nothing", then it begs the question of what function the con is actually meant to serve. And the most logical answer is "because they want to be specifically acknowledged as gay gamers" or "because they feel it's important for their sexuality to be expressly stated as part of the event". That's drawing attention to yourselves, and you don't get to pretend that we're being bigoted for pointing that out. | |
Its not one ass shot mate, its actually pretty common place, for both genders. At any time in which someone enters a scene for the first time who is not just attractive, but is meant to be super attractive, the slow pan (which is the actual name of the technique) is used as cinematography short hand for; beware this character is being established as very attractive, just so you know.
yep, totally for men. Hey you know those games literally made for girls, those are made for men too. Hey, what about words with friends, oh yeah totally for men, only men know how to spell & have friends. Come off it mate, drop the hyperbolic bullshit. Neither gaming culture, nor the gaming industry is made specifically for men. | |
Last I checked, you could be totally be 100% hetero and still go to a gaymer con. . Straight men and women go with their friends to gay and lesbian bars all the time. Now the question is this, are you going to be comfortable with man on man PDA? Stuff like hugging and kissing? If not, the only thing that is stopping you from going is your own homophobia. | |
Just FYI: Being uncomfortable seeing two guys making out is not homophobia, anymnore then being put off by seeing your parents suck face in public makes you bigoted against them.
Nope. Remember when Feminist said things like "we aren't going to take away your toys", right before taking away your toys? Yeah, they broke those toys, so you couldn't play with them anymore... Now there toys on the other hand, you aren't even allowed to look at. I could see how you'd be mistaken in thinking that was some kind of double standard, but apparently thats because of patriarchy, or sexism, or some silly sound bite. | |
Gaming culture != every game ever made. Stop being disingenuous. | |
Faggot is a great way to cause offence because it's *Offensive*! Jesus Christ is that really so hard to get? When you use Faggot you are not using a synonym for "bad". You are using a synonym for homosexual. You are attacking something unchangeable about me in order to make me feel bad, or you are playing on the cultural bullshit attached to straight people in order to make them feel bad because you are implying that THEY ARE LIKE ME. What about that is unclear? "Faggot" isn't a harmless generic insult, it is a targeted slur that is deliberately designed to make me and people like me feel bad SPECIFICALLY. We don't live in a society where gay people aren't marginalised, and I find it laughable that you seem to think we do. The word hasn't lost its homosexual meaning and all your assertions to the contrary are just wrong. I'm sorry, but it's not an arguable point. It's a question of facts and you got the facts dead wrong I won't even get into the history of the word, or that for most queer people it can be extremely triggering for them because they routinely might have heard it as they were getting *physically assaulted*. No, I won't get into any detail about that, because the bare facts that you are defending the use of a *highly* insulting word to insult people by saying they are like me and being like me is bad should be enough to make you feel deep shame. And you consistent lack of said shame says mountains about your character as a human being. Jesus Christ. You have gone beyond insulting, and beyond insensitive. I'm now actually angry with you and think less of you as a person.
The slurs, the threats, and the utter lack of understanding or willingness to attempt it from people such as you. We don't want you to use that word. It is offensive. Your continued insistence that it is fine to use that word is one of the reasons why we've basically gone "Screw it, we'll have our own con." | |
Your right: being uncomfortable around same gender PDA is not homophobia. It's only homophobia when someone feels entitled to stop it when it is amoungst consensting adult. | |
You were the one that said & i quote
[emphasis mine] A culture is made up of its membership of people & the material created for that culture. You want me to stop mocking you for saying hyperbolic absolutist claims, that are easy to mock? Then stop making hyperbolic absolutist claims, that are easy to mock. | |
https://www.gaymercon.org/panels There's a list of the panels. That's what's different. | |
I can't think what there is to discuss except for humans are very horrible people and are scared of other things that are not them. There does need to be one. The largest demographic for geek culture are white straight men. This means the panels discussed and the content will tend to appeal more to that demographic. Cons for other demographics are healthy because it means the panels can be different and can talk about different things. And don't worry. I highly doubt you'd be banned from the Con if you don't find the genitalia of your own gender aesthetically pleasing. | |
| Pages PREV 1 . . . 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 . . . 23 NEXT | |
I literally posted plenty of examples of why the entertainment industry is aimed at straight white males in the post above you. Even straight people in this very thread have acknowledged this fact.
Sexuality has to do with gaming because of a secret I'm going to let you in on: sex sells. Shocking, I know. It would surprise you to know that sexuality pervades every aspect of the entertainment industry (and especially in products aimed at young adults). And if you take a look at how sexuality is portrayed in games, you'll see they're predominantly done with a straight white male focus. Most male leads are sensibly (and properly) clothed and any attractiveness they might have is downplayed. They're also usually white and any romantic relationships they have (from casual flirting or hookups to spouses) are almost universally of the opposite gender. Women, on the other hand, are portrayed in revealing clothing, their attractiveness is highly emphasised and they're rarely developed beyond eyecandy or secondary roles.
If you want to start digging up examples, I assure you, we'll be here all night.