the problem is people seriously underestimate how much sexuality affects our day to day lives, because they take for granted their orientation is the "norm"
Steves gay thing?
his husband died
he was upset about that
[I/]that's it[/I]
now I will concede the main problem with sam and steve from ME3 was not how those characters were, it was the fact they were thrown in at the last minute because up until then Bioware (or EA) were avoiding the gay thing until ME3 (because it was finally cool in 2012? who knows, I don't care) had we had more time with sam/steve then it wouldn't have been as much of an issue
but I say it again on their own [b/]they were fine[/b] a man being sad about his dead husband presented as a straight faced serious moment (because all too often being gay is a punchline in of itself) is too much for some people then its really their problem
because IRL gay people have partners and they mention them in casual conversation...you know, assuming theyre comfortable enough
It's less about making a mockery and more about the fact that it's being used as a wedge issue, one that's being hammered on by both sides. There a lot of groups using it for purely political purposes to get elected, and to undermine people of faith. That's as far as I'll go with that bit, but the real issue is that the laws need to be rewritten. As the laws stand they're written from a theological standpoint to a large extent, and only exist at all because people abused the system of marriage before it was law. So we really can't address the inequality without wiping the slate clean. That's not to say that all previous marriage licenses should be made invalid, but the law needs to be reworked from the ground up. The consequences are mostly related to damaging one group to serve another for political reasons.
Vault101 said:
KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime said:
The rest are a bunch of social/cultural warriors who demand things for smaller groups, who have no idea that by fighting someone else's fight they're undermining that fight. .
Allies aren't the real issue, especially when they have a voice in arenas that you don't. The problem sets in with groups of people who are using minority communities as wedges for political motives, instead of actually trying to improve things. Because you can promise equality for everyone and to fight the good fight, but you rarely see it happen. Once someone gets their pat on the back, and/or into office, suddenly they no longer care, until someone asks again, or it's time to run for reelection.
Upon coming onto the forums I'd promptly heard about MKX's new supposed openly gay character, Kung Jin. I didn't even know MKX was coming out and I wouldn't have cared if I didn't see the SJW character. (Yes, yes I can feel the 'you shouldn't pick a game merely because it has a certain character archtype- blah blah blah coming on, just wait.)
This got me thinking, why are there so many gay/LGBT characters suddenly? Sure, its a progressive decision to make...then I realized why.
The most vocal demographic is now not the 'stereotypical'/'assumed' heterosexual white male but the internet sjws, the people that hate them, the people that support the addition, the people that hate it and everyone that heads to twitter, or tumblr, or the internet forums or whatever to talk about it.
Why?
Because its nearly-free advertising, plain and simple. (There are other reasons, such as people just wanting to write characters who are gay or in the LGBT group rainbow, people who are required to put at least one gay character in, etc)
Say a character is gay, in some way imply that this has had a negative effect on their life and let the e-cocks begin battle. Every gaming news website (for lack of better words) will swarm upon it like starved creatures on roadkill because there's virtually nothing to report that will cause as much forum posting, internet ranting or mere conversation. You don't even have to show them having sex with someone of the same gender or dressing up as the opposite sex. Just imply it, and people will swarm on it (and if anything, the more you tease them the more they want it. See: Sherlock fandom. And yes, that was intended)
My point is, do you think that this effect has somehow...'fetishized' the original point of HAVING inclusive characters, which was to give LGBT people and youth someone to look up to for reasons, not just because of their sexuality but also because of the trials they face that are NOT related to their sexuality? Does this say that LGBT people are not people anymore but now are nothing more then their sexuality/personal identity, etc, a symbol of previous oppression instead of an actually fleshed out character?
Additional notes below, but its basically a rant/further one-person self discussion on the topic.
My favorite character within in the past 2 years of gaming was an asexual spirit...ghost...apparition...with the body and face of a farm hand and a 'human terms and phrases and society are really weird and I adorably don't get it' personality like Teen Titan's Starfire (Dragon Age Inquisition: Cole. Such a cutie).
I love LGBT characters. I enjoy the concept of having more progressive games, games with more inclusive narratives and things such as that.
Now, is this to say that somehow a gay character is always a good addition to the game? In my opinion as an author, not really. After all, I am a non-heteronormative (Asexual) and I believe we've hit a point where we unfortunately have turned gay/lgbt people into false heroes who are ONLY strictly fighting against one specific thing: ignorance. They, in the narratives in which they exist, only seem to exist with the singular problem of not being excepted due to their sexuality/personal preferences.
Instead of writing characters we write lgbt people, whose only problems revolve in and around their gayness. They don't have the 'normal everyday problems' we humans face, they aren't people who are lgbt. They are lgbt icons. People whose only worth and value in any form of narrative comes from the ignorance they fight against. They aren't on a quest to save the world because its the right thing to do, they're on a quest to save the world cause their non-heteronormativity pushes them to do it. They don't have rent or bills to pay, or anything stress over other then being lgbt. They're just there to be a messiah like figure that only gets rejected due to the ignorance of the rest of humanity (aside from our more then likely heterosexual protagonist who is always so totally cool with the whole thing.) This turns them into forgettable one-off characters who don't ever really impact anything, including the narrative they are in.
I believe we need to humanize our LGBT characters, give them you know...actual issues to fight against that are no different then those of their straight counterparts. Then let people know either through narrative THAT DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND THEIR SEXUALITY that the character is the way he/she/the mx., is.
To wrap it up...I want more games like Rogue's Legacy in which a character could be gay and it does impact gameplay/get revealed through narrative in an extremely subtle sense (gay character changes which statues drop meat/mana.) and not like MK X's 'People didn't like me because I was gay'.
I agree with you. Mostly because it feels like homosexuality has to be a main focal point for a character, instead of it being something integrated into them so well that it shouldn't need to be focused on. Sexual orientation is a difficult subject though, as much as we want equality, it is hard to get that outside of needing to break through years of ignoring it and trying hard to pretend it doesn't exist. :< I hate it... homosexuality and heterosexuality should be treated the same in terms of how they're handled. Rarely the later is fixated upon extremely, they're just something that everyone has their own opinion or tastes on. Do they love anyone at all, do they feel the need to find love, or is it something they just ignore?
We're still working on developing that though, but it feels like as time goes on, social views will gradually make sexuality in general something that doesn't need to be the main focus and attribute of someone.
Honestly, I don't know why this even has to be a point of discussion. As a gay man, I looked at the fact that Kung Jin was gay, went "Huh. Alright. That's cool." and moved on with my life. For some reason, everyone and their grandmother has to go OMFG at the news.
Reality is: gay people exist, and they like to be represented in games. As someone who designs tabletops, and makes characters for those tabletops in stories, what people have to understand is that it takes effort to make a token ANYTHING in any game or creative setting.
This isn't token. It just is. And there's nothing wrong with that.
It's not the fact that a character is gay. There were gay characters in brokeback mountain. But brokeback mountain is a film that deals with the topic of homosexuality. Mortal Kombat doesn't. It's the fact that this is shoe-horned into the game to please the SJWs.
Just out of curiosity, in the opinions of the people here, what exactly is the difference between pandering and targeted marketing?
It seems whenever people include women, ethnic minorities, or LGBT for the sole reason that they believe it will make them money from the publicity, there are the inevitable hoards who call this cynical pandering to the SJWs.
Yet, whenever people criticise the number of straight, white men in games and movies, people will defend this as simply being targeted marketing; an intelligent business decision based upon demographic data and the reality of gaming as an industry.
It's almost as if targeted marketing is just a euphemism for pandering towards me, or more correctly, pandering is actually a dysphemism for targeted marketing.
Also, where the hell are these legions of LGBT characters, and why should I be bothered by them?
It's not the fact that a character is gay. There were gay characters in brokeback mountain. But brokeback mountain is a film that deals with the topic of homosexuality. Mortal Kombat doesn't. It's the fact that this is shoe-horned into the game to please the SJWs.
Wait.. so gay characters should only be allowed in media that deals with the topic of homosexuality? If there's a gay character in something that's not specifically about being LGBT, that's suddenly pandering? Straight romance is okay even if the game/movie/series is not specifically about love or romance, so why can't the same be true for gay romance or just gay identity?
Just out of curiosity, in the opinions of the people here, what exactly is the difference between pandering and targeted marketing?
It seems whenever people include women, ethnic minorities, or LGBT for the sole reason that they believe it will make them money from the publicity, there are the inevitable hoards who call this cynical pandering to the SJWs.
Yet, whenever people criticise the number of straight, white men in games and movies, people will defend this as simply being targeted marketing; an intelligent business decision based upon demographic data and the reality of gaming as an industry.
It's almost as if targeted marketing is just a euphemism for pandering towards me, or more correctly, pandering is actually a dysphemism for targeted marketing.
Also, where the hell are these legions of LGBT characters, and why should I be bothered by them?
No. You're talking shit. No one has a problem with women and black people or other races being included. Go back to the 90's. Did anyone ever complain about female characters in games like Final Fantasy or Metal Gear Solid? No. No one ever argued that Meryl was introduced in Metal Gear Solid to pander to people who wanna see women in games. No one ever complained about women being present in games, or about black or asian people in games. Stop talking shit.
What people have a problem with is when creators turn a character like Thor into a woman, for no other reason than to please the SJW crowd. What people have a problem with is people going around with a checklist and making sure every possible sexuality and ethnicity gets a token character. What people have a problem with is characters being shoe-horned into games to fill some quotas.
As for gay people, there is just no good way of doing it, at least in a lot of games. There wasn't a single game I have ever played where the sexuality of a character mattered. And it shouldn't. It's silly. There are only a number of ways in which you can have a gay character that I can think of.
1) Have a stereotypical gay character
This would be seen by most people as weird, awful, and maybe even homophobic.
2) Try to be subtle about it
Just have him or her talk about how he has a husband or how she has a wife. The problem here is that it really does not make the character or the story any better. The gender of the person someone sleeps with will have no influence on his character or on the events that will happen. The only conclusion for the player will be that this character was made gay just for the sake of having a gay character. Even if you're trying to be subtle about it, it will feel forced and shoe-horned into it.
3) Make his or her homosexuality part of the story
Have a character whose homosexuality is an important part of the story. Someone who struggles with the problems a homosexual person might have in certain life situations. Show how they are not accepted by a certain group or how they have to hide their sexuality and what that does to them. The problem with this is that this is not good for every game. Games are usually not about sexuality. You would have to find the right kind of game to leverage that kind of story. And even if you did, it's questionable whether the game would actually be successful.
Option 1) is obviously stupid, option 2) is pointless. Option 3 is something I don't have a problem with. There can be games that deal with homosexuality. Just don't expect everyone to like them.
Anja Bech said:
The Only Gay Eskimo said:
It's not the fact that a character is gay. There were gay characters in brokeback mountain. But brokeback mountain is a film that deals with the topic of homosexuality. Mortal Kombat doesn't. It's the fact that this is shoe-horned into the game to please the SJWs.
Wait.. so gay characters should only be allowed in media that deals with the topic of homosexuality? If there's a gay character in something that's not specifically about being LGBT, that's suddenly pandering? Straight romance is okay even if the game/movie/series is not specifically about love or romance, so why can't the same be true for gay romance or just gay identity?
Please point out to me where I made a statement about where they should be allowed or not.
The problem with gay romance is that not everybody wants to see that. Most people are straight. Personally I'm almost always against romance at all because I find it boring. There are only a few exceptions. But how is a straight guy going to enjoy watching a gay romance? You will probably make the same argument for why there should be gay romances, since gay people can relate better to that. Then understand that most people are straight, so making a straight romance is more profitable. If gay romance was popular game designers would pump out one gay romance game after another, because it would be the best way to make money. I'm fine with games that have gay romances in them, I'm just probably never going to play them, just like I didn't watch brokeback mountain or queer as folk.
Anyone who cares about Social Justice is a SJW? Nice to see the threshold is so low.
Also people who aren't LGBT championing the rights of LGBT people? They have compassion for others? How horrible. People who weren't slaves or black championed the abolitionist movement in America. Men supported female suffrage. I don't see why caring for groups you aren't part of is a bad thing.
Pretty much ... I'm trans, I support trans equality. My friend is staight and cisgender ... he supports trans equality. He does so because he thinks it's in the best pursuit of liberty, and because he likes me. But apparently, that's not enough reason for why someone might want to better the circumstances for others. Seems pretty fucking hollow to me. I'm not a tiger, but I still think Bengal tigers should be a protected species. Does that mean I'm a 'tiger justice warrior'?
Also, funnily enough. Why exactly isn't the flipside of this argument also relevant? Why are people who criticise 'SJWs' have a right to talk in interference of the political discussion, or report about it at all, if they claim to be sick of non- talking about ?
Knight Captain Kerr said:
Maybe, and I know this is a crazy idea, but maybe developers include LGBT characters because they want to. Pretty sure that's the case in Bioware games. And maybe we are seeing more LGBT people in things now because they're more socially accepted than they were even a decade ago. Were there same-sex relations (including marriage) in Fallout 2 back in 1998 because they were hoping it what get lots of internet publicity or because Black Isle wanted to?
As a personal note I didn't really know what bisexuality was until my teenage years (kind of horrible that that was possible in retrospect, good job Irish education system) because nobody ever mentioned it to me and media never had bisexual characters. My favourite game as a teen (and still my favourite game today) was Fallout: New Vegas and I thought it was really neat that I could play a bisexual protagonist in that game and that all the other LGBT people were treated as people like anyone else. So as a bisexual teen media probably did impact me and help me come to terms with myself. There's probably a Trans person out there right now who's favourite game is Dragon Age: Inquisition and Krem helps them come to terms with who they are. It's not the reason people do it but I consider that a pretty good side effect.
Yeah ... it's pretty much normalization. Krem was a pretty good character ... because it just talked about the process of normalization that lead to a character just being out and staying out. There's no eroticisation, there's no pandering to sensibilities. Unless you talk to fuckwits who consider it a political tool. In truth given that it's more and more accepted ... maybe there is a person out there that thinks;
"Well, I/my friend is trans. And honestly, that sounds like an interesting character to write about."
It's not bad that someone wants to have a LGBT character in a game, and it's certainly not 'pandering' to people given that many of the things that Krem has gone through correlate to modern problems. And what's odd, is that it does more to stifle creative thought, of creative storytelling, if an author wants to write indepth characters and character histories, and is merely treated as an 'SJW' and proclaiming Krem to be 'token' or 'unnecessary'.
If people can't write genuine characters with genuine stories and genuine life experiences, then I can tell you now ... the game becomes unnecessary.
Anyone who cares about Social Justice is a SJW? Nice to see the threshold is so low.
Also people who aren't LGBT championing the rights of LGBT people? They have compassion for others? How horrible. People who weren't slaves or black championed the abolitionist movement in America. Men supported female suffrage. I don't see why caring for groups you aren't part of is a bad thing.
Pretty much ... I'm trans, I support trans equality. My friend is staight and cisgender ... he supports trans equality. He does so because he thinks it's in the best pursuit of liberty, and because he likes me. But apparently, that's not enough reason for why someone might want to better the circumstances for others. Seems pretty fucking hollow to me. I'm not a tiger, but I still think Bengal tigers should be a protected species. Does that mean I'm a 'tiger justice warrior'?
Also, funnily enough. Why exactly isn't the flipside of this argument also relevant? Why are people who criticise 'SJWs' have a right to talk in interference of the political discussion, or report about it at all, if they claim to be sick of non- talking about ?
Knight Captain Kerr said:
Maybe, and I know this is a crazy idea, but maybe developers include LGBT characters because they want to. Pretty sure that's the case in Bioware games. And maybe we are seeing more LGBT people in things now because they're more socially accepted than they were even a decade ago. Were there same-sex relations (including marriage) in Fallout 2 back in 1998 because they were hoping it what get lots of internet publicity or because Black Isle wanted to?
As a personal note I didn't really know what bisexuality was until my teenage years (kind of horrible that that was possible in retrospect, good job Irish education system) because nobody ever mentioned it to me and media never had bisexual characters. My favourite game as a teen (and still my favourite game today) was Fallout: New Vegas and I thought it was really neat that I could play a bisexual protagonist in that game and that all the other LGBT people were treated as people like anyone else. So as a bisexual teen media probably did impact me and help me come to terms with myself. There's probably a Trans person out there right now who's favourite game is Dragon Age: Inquisition and Krem helps them come to terms with who they are. It's not the reason people do it but I consider that a pretty good side effect.
Yeah ... it's pretty much normalization. Krem was a pretty good character ... because it just talked about the process of normalization that lead to a character just being out and staying out. There's no eroticisation, there's no pandering to sensibilities. Unless you talk to fuckwits who consider it a political tool, in truth given that it's more and more accepted ... maybe there is a person out there that thinks;
"Well, I/my friend is trans. And honestly, that sounds like an interesting character to write about."
It's not bad that someone wants to have a LGBT character in a game, and it's certainly not 'pandering' to people given that many of the things that Krem has gone through correlate to modern problems. And what's odd, is that it does more to stifle creative thought, of creative storytelling, if an author wants to write indepth characters and character histories, and is merely treated as an 'SJW' and proclaiming Krem to be 'token' or 'unnecessary'.
If people can't write genuine characters with genuine stories and genuine life experiences, then I can tell you now ... the game becomes unnecessary.
Krem was probably one of the best examples of a trans character I've ever seen in games so far.
The problem a lot of people have is when it's not normalization that it's being done for. I keep seeing a lot of the same argument that people seem to think that (insert minority group) wants people to stay away from their problems. That's not the case, wanting a better situation for other people is great. The problem arises when said minority group starts being used as a wedge politically. When people start wandering around with diversity check-lists and demanding diversity for reasons other than normalization. Basically when it becomes a measure of political correctness and how good that political correctness makes you look is when things get bad.
When you have to make sure everyone knows a character is gay with announcements outside the fictional work, that's when token territory rears it's head. It goes from "this will be an interesting character to write" to "LOOK! WE PUT A GAY CHARACTER IN!" That's shallow and manipulative. It's what happens when you get people more concerned with having a character of a specific mold for the sake of diversity, rather than writing a character that's just different.
Just out of curiosity, in the opinions of the people here, what exactly is the difference between pandering and targeted marketing?
It seems whenever people include women, ethnic minorities, or LGBT for the sole reason that they believe it will make them money from the publicity, there are the inevitable hoards who call this cynical pandering to the SJWs.
Yet, whenever people criticise the number of straight, white men in games and movies, people will defend this as simply being targeted marketing; an intelligent business decision based upon demographic data and the reality of gaming as an industry.
It's almost as if targeted marketing is just a euphemism for pandering towards me, or more correctly, pandering is actually a dysphemism for targeted marketing.
Also, where the hell are these legions of LGBT characters, and why should I be bothered by them?
No. You're talking shit. No one has a problem with women and black people or other races being included. Go back to the 90's. Did anyone ever complain about female characters in games like Final Fantasy or Metal Gear Solid? No. No one ever argued that Meryl was introduced in Metal Gear Solid to pander to people who wanna see women in games. No one ever complained about women being present in games, or about black or asian people in games. Stop talking shit.
What people have a problem with is when creators turn a character like Thor into a woman, for no other reason than to please the SJW crowd. What people have a problem with is people going around with a checklist and making sure every possible sexuality and ethnicity gets a token character. What people have a problem with is characters being shoe-horned into games to fill some quotas.
I seem to have really upset you to the point that you've forgot to address my post at all, and instead attacked some things I didn't even say. Good job.
I never said that people have a problem with every female, ethnic or gay character, although your claim that no one has a problem with these types of characters is blatantly false.
My point was that when people make a character straight/white/male specifically because they believe it to be profitable, most people will defend this as an intelligent business decision and will require no justification for that character's traits. When people make a character LGBT/ethnic/female specifically because they believe it to be profitable, most people will whine about this character being "token" or "shoe-horned" into the game to appease the SJWs, and will begin quibbling over whether or not the character's gender/race/sexuality is absolutely necessary.
As for gay people, there is just no good way of doing it, at least in a lot of games. There wasn't a single game I have ever played where the sexuality of a character mattered. And it shouldn't. It's silly. There are only a number of ways in which you can have a gay character that I can think of.
1) Have a stereotypical gay character
This would be seen by most people as weird, awful, and maybe even homophobic.
2) Try to be subtle about it
Just have him or her talk about how he has a husband or how she has a wife. The problem here is that it really does not make the character or the story any better. The gender of the person someone sleeps with will have no influence on his character or on the events that will happen. The only conclusion for the player will be that this character was made gay just for the sake of having a gay character. Even if you're trying to be subtle about it, it will feel forced and shoe-horned into it.
3) Make his or her homosexuality part of the story
Have a character whose homosexuality is an important part of the story. Someone who struggles with the problems a homosexual person might have in certain life situations. Show how they are not accepted by a certain group or how they have to hide their sexuality and what that does to them. The problem with this is that this is not good for every game. Games are usually not about sexuality. You would have to find the right kind of game to leverage that kind of story. And even if you did, it's questionable whether the game would actually be successful.
Option 1) is obviously stupid, option 2) is pointless. Option 3 is something I don't have a problem with. There can be games that deal with homosexuality. Just don't expect everyone to like them.
I don't see any problem with option 2. It's funny that you seem to claim that people aren't against diversity, only enforced diversity, yet you also claim that having a gay character simply exist in a subtle way is enough to feel forced and require more justification than if they were straight.
If the sexuality of characters didn't matter to anyone, there wouldn't be anyone asking for more gay characters, or arguing against it. That fact is, sexuality matters to a lot of people, straight or otherwise, and so you will see plenty of straight characters to appease the majority, and a handful of gay characters to appease the minority. If sexuality is so unimportant, why must people throw a tantrum whenever an openly gay character is announced?
And before anyone responds with some variation of "because marketers make a big deal out it", that is called marketing to a niche. Since people who want straight characters can pick up virtually any game on the market to find a straight character, people who want gay characters will have significantly fewer options, so it makes sense for people providing those options to increase visibility.
That's business for you. The same type of business that ensures most characters are straight white and male, is the same type that ensures there are options for the niche market. If you want these marketers to changer their strategies just for you, then fine, but don't pretend you are any different to the SJWs in that regard.
-snip-
Thanks for taking just a small snippet without addressing the point as a whole. Nice way to make a strawman argument there.
If you bothered to address my actual point: It's the people who do it so they can give themselves a politically correct pat on the back, not the people who actually care about equality. Most people will jump on a bandwagon so they can feel good about themselves for doing the bare minimum, not because they care about whatever group is being oppressed. As soon as these things leave the headlines these so called empathetic people suddenly vanish, is that a coincidence? No it's because they do it more to look good and feel good about themselves. While plenty of people actually do care, they generally get drowned out when the outrage group descends on the cause they support. Which usually leaves the cause the worse for wear in the short term. Non-LGBTQ people can support the LGBTQ community, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Where it gets upsetting, wrong, and bad, is when people do it to look good socially and for political reasons only, instead of actually caring about the issue at hand.
As you'll never know for sure who is doing it for the pat on the back and who is doing it because they are a good person, isn't it better to be less damning, and avoid risking tarnishing the good with the same brush you're tarring those wanting a pat on the back.
slightly off topic, I think LBGT has more letters now, but I really can't keep up.
FirstNameLastName said:
Just out of curiosity, in the opinions of the people here, what exactly is the difference between pandering and targeted marketing?
It seems whenever people include women, ethnic minorities, or LGBT for the sole reason that they believe it will make them money from the publicity, there are the inevitable hoards who call this cynical pandering to the SJWs.
Yet, whenever people criticise the number of straight, white men in games and movies, people will defend this as simply being targeted marketing; an intelligent business decision based upon demographic data and the reality of gaming as an industry.
It's almost as if targeted marketing is just a euphemism for pandering towards me, or more correctly, pandering is actually a dysphemism for targeted marketing.
Also, where the hell are these legions of LGBT characters, and why should I be bothered by them?
this isn't a big revelation thing. The problem is the SJWs haven't ever played any fucking video games, there have been trans and gay characters in games for fucking decades they just never see them because they don't play video games.
Immediate examples, Birdo from Mario, Poison (just Poison), Faris from FFV (bit dicey but she adopts a male gender for most of the game despite being a biological woman), could probably slip Bro from FFVII in there too depending how rigid we want to be about it (in fact, pretty much all of Wall Market), let's see, what else...
Joachim from Shadow Hearts II, he is a pro-wrestling vampire who's in the closet but heavily implied to be gay (the flamboyance is actually unrelated, it's in his whole 'Buzz Lightyear' persona)
This is what's REALLY burning me up lately, I've been aware of gay or trans characters in gaming since I was a kid but I'm now being told that my hobby is exclusive. That we don't allow gay characters and how it's a big deal and how we need SJWs to march in and correct us all. I have to hear people unironically ***** about FFXV having an all male cast while Squenix do a Hd re-release of FFX-2 because the people complaining don't play the fucking games. And they aren't going to buy Mortal Kombat! That game is just one huge trigger warning! They aren't including a gay character to appease SJWs because they don't play games! Maybe it is token-ism, maybe NRS just feel bad they haven't actually considered including a gay character and rectify it (because again, Zangief is a thing, oh look I got another one)
So yeah... fuck people saying there aren't gay or trans characters in gaming. Those people don't play fucking video games (/rant over)
I really don't get pandering.
Has anyone ever said "this character is black/female/homosexual/lgbt/abcdefg, I can't relate to his/her/xis/asdasd emotions or conflicts."? Especially when it's not the sole focus of the narrative?
Sure, you make a character driven exploration of the human sexuality, of course people will perceive it differently based on themselves, but in worlds with aliens, monsters, and other stuff, rainbow identities are a rather minor thing to include.
I've seen spaceships mate, what do I care if some dude likes guys?
Also, seeing a character who resembles me mostly just fills me with contempt. No I don't want to watch this romantically ineffective nerd chase some girl! No, I don't want to relate to him, go away!
At least the captcha is telling me to "stop wasting time"...
Immediate examples, Birdo from Mario, Poison (just Poison), Faris from FFV (bit dicey but she adopts a male gender for most of the game despite being a biological woman), could probably slip Bro from FFVII in there too depending how rigid we want to be about it (in fact, pretty much all of Wall Market), let's see, what else...
Joachim from Shadow Hearts II, he is a pro-wrestling vampire who's in the closet but heavily implied to be gay (the flamboyance is actually unrelated, it's in his whole 'Buzz Lightyear' persona)
Birdo and Poison are actually both females in their respective canons actually. They didn't change Birdo or Poison into female characters either that's how they were originally. Nintendo of America had a problem with any narrative where you could hit a female character, so they made gender swaps a mandate if there was a female character you could hit. At least in the NES and early SNES days. Other companies had to comply with those wishes to get the games publish. Which lead to a controversy in it self because while saying that it's bad to hit girls, Nintendo of America stepped in it with the trans community by basically saying it's okay to brutalize trans people.
Krem was probably one of the best examples of a trans character I've ever seen in games so far.
The problem a lot of people have is when it's not normalization that it's being done for. I keep seeing a lot of the same argument that people seem to think that (insert minority group) wants people to stay away from their problems. That's not the case, wanting a better situation for other people is great. The problem arises when said minority group starts being used as a wedge politically. When people start wandering around with diversity check-lists and demanding diversity for reasons other than normalization. Basically when it becomes a measure of political correctness and how good that political correctness makes you look is when things get bad.
When you have to make sure everyone knows a character is gay with announcements outside the fictional work, that's when token territory rears it's head. It goes from "this will be an interesting character to write" to "LOOK! WE PUT A GAY CHARACTER IN!" That's shallow and manipulative. It's what happens when you get people more concerned with having a character of a specific mold for the sake of diversity, rather than writing a character that's just different.
I literally had no idea one of the characters was gay (nor have I played it) until someone started talking about those who was in opposition to said gay character. The devs didn't make it a blaring, blazing thing. It was only brought up because someone asked whether Kung Jin was gay. So I fail to see how it's shallow? It just seems to be a case of 'doomed if you do, doomed if you don't.'
The characters could have made him blazingly obvious he was gay and MKX's first gay character, people would have ripped into him. Or they could have made it subtle, playing into the background of not really finding acceptance in a Shaolin organization, given that homosexuality is deemed 'sexual misconduct' in most East Asian Buddhist circles --- Which they did --- and they still got ripped into for it.
The only manipulation here seems to be people investing into a story of MKX commodifying homosexuality, when in truth it seems to be people writing for or against that seem to be making this bigger than it is. Is it badly written or expounded on? Maybe ... but then again, this isn't the video game equivalent of Lord of the Rings.
(Edit) Also, remember, MK is BIGGER than just video games. Maybe this will be explored in the comics ... who knows? What if there is a stroyline about how Kung Jin struggled with self imposed celibacy, and forcing himself into a culture that takes a dim view of homosexuality ... only to find that he wants to blaze his own path with his lover all along ... etc etc etc. Being hunted by people considering him a traitor, or maybe one of Earthrealm's enemies, whilst trying to keep himself and his partner safe. Lots of things could be done with a gay character that won't be considered 'token' in the expanded MK universe with the comics, movies, etc.
To be quite honest in a game like MKX which focuses purely on the fighting any form of focus on character sexuality is irrelevant. I haven't played MKX yet but if they handle homosexuality in the same way they did heterosexuality in the previous entries (not a major plot point, maybe a bit of flirting and appreciation of another characters looks) then I'd say it was done sensibly. If they do something like Kung Jin had a relationship with the new ruler of outworld and the new ruler is causing havoc because he is sad at being dumped then that would be blatant pandering.
As for Kung Jin himself I like look of the character. I think introducing an LGBT character as a completely new character is the right thing to do. Sexuality hasn't been a big deal in mortal kombat before, Johnny Cage is the only real example of someone who is flirty and seemingly interested in sex. So making homosexuality a big deal now would be blatant pandering.
This recent obsession with "identity" is the big problem. People do not, and should never be encouraged to, identify solely with their race, sex or sexual orientation... People are far, FAR more complex than that, really those things you were born with make up only a fraction of what you are as an individual. People have goals in life, ambitions, moral values, they care, they love, they think, they invent, they build...
In a game (or book, film, any entertainment product), I identify with characters based on how they think and live their lives, not what colour their skin is or whether they have breasts, or want to sleep with the same sex...
Birdo and Poison are actually both females in their respective canons actually. They didn't change Birdo or Poison into female characters either that's how they were originally. Nintendo of America had a problem with any narrative where you could hit a female character, so they made gender swaps a mandate if there was a female character you could hit. At least in the NES and early SNES days. Other companies had to comply with those wishes to get the games publish. Which lead to a controversy in it self because while saying that it's bad to hit girls, Nintendo of America stepped in it with the trans community by basically saying it's okay to brutalize trans people.
I had to check, but apparently Birdo is now listed as female. Poison, however, is officially trans (also, Poison got replaced by Sid in America so the whole beating up trans people thing is kind of a non-issue at least as far as Final Fight goes. She didn't appear as Poison until she was playable, at least to the best of my knowledge.)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
this isn't a big revelation thing. The problem is the SJWs haven't ever played any fucking video games, there have been trans and gay characters in games for fucking decades they just never see them because they don't play video games.
