The Surge in LGBT rainbow characters - AKA: The New Demographic and why its happening.

[Silvanus]

its like you can eather have "ruby fruit jungle" or nothing, and even then people will put the latter in the "strictly not for me" category

Hey, I've actually heard of that!

Anywho, the idea that those we don't agree with must be outsiders (as CaptainMarvelous says "SJWs" don't play games) is just a convenient, essentially baseless idea, and a very familiar one. It's a tired old tactic to imagine your way of thinking is the only genuine one, and those who disagree are just fibbing about it somehow.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

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.

So yeah... fuck people saying there aren't gay or trans characters in gaming. Those people don't play fucking video games (/rant over)

hello resident not straight SJW reporting in to be the representative of my entire demographic! *waves*

yes gay people play games, in fact they might play games more than they read books or comics going by numbers alone, and hell there are more books/comics with gay characters then there are games

so like...seriously I don't know where the hell you got this idea

how many gay SJW's are on this very forum? I know for a fact I'm not the only one

Yeah, I had this talk with Spot several pages ago but it sounds like you missed the point more severely: I'm not saying there aren't gay gamers (I don't know where you got that notion) or that there is no-one who defines themselves as an SJW who games(although I would've that the label is not one people would wish on themselves given the behaviour associated with it); I am saying that in recent times a number of people demanding representation in games a) are unaware that gay characters have existed in games for quite a long time (like the ones I reeled off of the top of my head in the first post you snipped) and so b) leads me to believe they don't play enough to be aware of their presence. Wanting more representation is not a problem for me, it's that people who are outside of video games are demanding they change the content to fit their world view which (again, as I said to Spot) the only way I can PROVE prove this is to trawl twitter for the various times people have insulted gamers while also demanding more representation and I just don't want to expose myself to that level of abuse. But that shouldn't be a problem unless you are going to claim everyone demanding more gay characters in video-games is a hardcore gamer which would be equally as impossible to prove.

Honestly, this might again come down to an issue of semantics as my definition of a SJW would presumably differ from yours given that... well, I haven't been directly insulted yet.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

Hey, I've actually heard of that!

Anywho, the idea that those we don't agree with must be outsiders (as CaptainMarvelous says "SJWs" don't play games) is just a convenient, essentially baseless idea, and a very familiar one. It's a tired old tactic to imagine your way of thinking is the only genuine one, and those who disagree are just fibbing about it somehow.

so is it intentionally ironic that you won't read my actual post and just decide I'm wrong because it won't fit your world view and it's easier for me to be the 'outsider' for whatever you and Vault feel your group is?

The whole point of the post that quote is excised from is that we've had gay characters in games for a long time and we've only recently started this big song and dance since the-gate-which-must-not-be-named occurred and that I feel (because that whole post was at least half based on emotion) that a number of people clamouring for it do not play games regularly because a) I've seen the shit on twitter and b) I could list quite a few off the top of my head which nobody seems to acknowledge.

Not to mention, I had this entire discussion IN THE THREAD where I admitted I was displaying a bias based on emotion but that I didn't see a reason I was incorrect in my assessment because I have seen it displayed before.

Should I look forward to a single quote of me saying I showed a bias and a lambasting or will this actually be addressed now?

 

[Silvanus]

a) are unaware that gay characters have existed in games for quite a long time (like the ones I reeled off of the top of my head in the first post you snipped)

They've existed in very small numbers, or tiny bit-parts. Your examples included Birdo, who featured in a game with almost no dialogue, and whose self-identity one wouldn't know unless they read the Japanese manual (or the internet years later); and Brother, who is among the minorest of minor characters in FFVII, a game with a relatively huge cast.

It's valid to bring them up, but they hardly challenge the thousands of straight romances involving protagonists and major characters.

Plenty of those who want better representation are long-time gamers, like myself, Vault101, and the others in this thread, I suspect.

its easier for me to be the 'outsider' for whatever you and Vault feel your group is

I never said anything about you being such; I only objected to your characterisation of those who disagree with you as non-gamers.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

a) are unaware that gay characters have existed in games for quite a long time (like the ones I reeled off of the top of my head in the first post you snipped)

They've existed in very small numbers, or tiny bit-parts. Your examples included Birdo, who featured in a game with almost no dialogue, and whose self-identity one wouldn't know unless they read the Japanese manual (or the internet years later); and Brother, who is among the minorest of minor characters in FFVII, a game with a relatively huge cast.

It's valid to bring them up, but they hardly challenge the thousands of straight romances involving protagonists and major characters.

Plenty of those who want better representation are long-time gamers, like myself, Vault101, and the others in this thread, I suspect.

Fair response, they aren't the best examples and more would indeed be better (and we could probably turn this into a "Is Kung Jin a good example" discussion but I still need to actually play the game and I'd rather be informed before commenting), and as I mentioned in subsequent posts I acknowledged my own error in not mentioning the validity of gamers wanting more gay characters (which includes myself, funnily enough, but it's not relevant to the discussion or point I was angling for)

My point was that while there are an ample number of folks who are dedicated gamers and who will recognise the obscure-ass references I made to existing gay characters, there are plenty who won't who will gladly label gamers as 'homophobic' 'misogynistic' and my ire was directed at those people (who frustratingly, I am unlikely to encounter on a GAMING forum so it's a 'facebook status' level of complaint). And in the interest of fairness (and in case you didn't see it) after discussing with Spot I am also of the opinion there will be folks complaining about Kung Jin's sexuality who likewise do not play video games and are simply complaining out of their own world-view.

 

[MrFalconfly]

snip

The causes may be different, but ostracised, is ostracised.

I was never dismissing their experiences. I just said that I knew what it was like to be ostracised, and that letting that fear control you is never a good plan in the long run. I know it's bloody hard not to, because it was a wall I had to break through myself.

The ONLY thing I was dismissing was the notion that there are some people who can't help themselves. Sorry but I don't believe that. Yeah you can have the most shitty parents in the world, and your boss might be a royal arsehole, but you know what? They never deserved your (general your, not you Vault101) company, and they can go drown in a pipe full of piss. What's important is that the person gets enough self-confidence that they WONT let arseholes push them around.

I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, or callous, but ultimately the only way for them to get help, is for them to realize that they can help themselves (and not in any shitty "pray away the gay" bullshit. I mean help themselves to realize that when it comes to their life they should own it, with everything that entails, and not be afraid to be a little brash).

EDIT:

This is why I think that US law (don't show, don't tell or whatever)that prohibited gays from serving in the military to be absolutely stupid. The military is, well, I don't know about the US army, but my stint in the Royal Danish Army was, one of the best confidence boosters out there.

I served with a person who was gay, and he was every bit a soldier like the rest of us. Why should it be any different?

 

[Vault101]

Hey, I've actually heard of that!

interesting book, although It is a product of its time in terms of its feminist angle

snip.

as far as I'm concerned SJW is a silly term in which the unironic use of it makes me raise my eyeborws...kind of like the word "slut"

to a lot of people I would be labelled a SJW, hell just going by how its used you dont have to be a "racial tumblr denzien" to be a SJW you just have to be unapologetically femenist and/or be supportive of inclusive media

the problem is you're just assuming anyone who wants more gay representation in games HAS to be an outsider...much like people have divided themselves as "gamers" and "SJW" never considering that you can be a "gamer" AND an care about that kind of thing

same "outsider" mentality that exists in all facets of nerd dom

and you know what? who actually cares? there are untapped markets here! much like comics are bringing new readers with stuff like Ms Marvel and Lady Thor Games have a chance to broaden their (already) wide appeal

 

[mecegirl]

snip

The causes may be different, but ostracised, is ostracised.

I was never dismissing their experiences. I just said that I knew what it was like to be ostracised, and that letting that fear control you is never a good plan in the long run. I know it's bloody hard not to, because it was a wall I had to break through myself.

The ONLY thing I was dismissing was the notion that there are some people who can't help themselves. Sorry but I don't believe that. Yeah you can have the most shitty parents in the world, and your boss might be a royal arsehole, but you know what? They never deserved your (general your, not you Vault101) company, and they can go drown in a pipe full of piss. What's important is that the person gets enough self-confidence that they WONT let arseholes push them around.

I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, or callous, but ultimately the only way for them to get help, is for them to realize that they can help themselves (and not in any shitty "pray away the gay" bullshit. I mean help themselves to realize that when it comes to their life they should own it, with everything that entails, and not be afraid to be a little brash).

EDIT:

This is why I think that US law (don't show, don't tell or whatever)that prohibited gays from serving in the military to be absolutely stupid. The military is, well, I don't know about the US army, but my stint in the Royal Danish Army was, one of the best confidence boosters out there.

I served with a person who was gay, and he was every bit a soldier like the rest of us. Why should it be any different?

Wow. See this is why the term "Check your privilege" exists. And I know I might start a shit storm by saying it, but I just don't see how anyone can be this blind to how harsh reality is. Lucky for you when you were bullied your parents had your back, my parents had my back too. But I knew kids who didn't have that in their life. Not everyone has family that will do that for them. For some kids telling their parents about why they were bullied would lead to further ostracization. So no, ostracized is not ostracized. Some carry a heavier burden. Can you honestly say that if your parents didn't support you back then that you would be the person you are today? Support systems are necessary for the type of self determination that you are talking about. Something like that goes beyond gay or straight, its just that overall its more likely that being a member of the LGBT spectrum increases the odds that you won't have support.

Its not as simple as a wall of fear for some people. I mean, how do you think your point of view would help a minor with homophobic parents? Please explain it to me. You do know that some people become homeless because they were disowned by their parents for being gay right? Just having your parents be uncomfortable around you is bad enough, but not every gay person is that lucky. And even that is a raw deal.

Wishing that such people "drown in a pipe full of piss" does shit when a person is on the streets because they have no where else to go. They can't just help themselves when they are only in high school with no job or significant savings. They can't just help themselves when a portion of the people willing to help them would only do so in order to sexually abuse them. They can't even always rely on shelters because it will depend on if the individuals running the shelter would be sympathetic to their plight.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Wow. See this is why the term "Check your privilege" exists.

Yes I realize I'm privileged to live in a country that has decided that education is something we all should have access to.

That is my privilege.

Not every country supports the citizens who decide to pursue a higher education, but luckily for me Denmark does, which means I receive close to 1000 USD every month because I'm studying engineering at DTU.

That is a privilege, I freely admit that. And it's a privilege I share with every other Dane.

Was there anything else?

EDIT:

How about, instead of asking me to "check my privilege", you actually check your civil rights. Because what you claim are my privileges, isn't. They're the rights of every citizen in any civilized country.

EDIT:EDIT:

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't dismiss my experiences.

 

[JimB]

How about, instead of asking me to "check my privilege," you actually check your civil rights. Because what you claim are my privileges, isn't. They're the rights of every citizen in any civilized country.

What is a right in theory can be a privilege in practice. For instance, in theory gay people have the same right as straight people to not be murdered by being tied to the bumper of a pick-up truck and dragged for a few miles down gravel roads as punishment for the sin of having a sexual orientation, but in practice it's somewhat more of a privilege straight people get to enjoy disproportionately to gay people.

Admittedly that's an extreme example, but I'm just using to illustrate that telling someone, "This is my civil right," is not the crucifix-versus-vampires level of defense you seem to think it is.

 

[MrFalconfly]

How about, instead of asking me to "check my privilege," you actually check your civil rights. Because what you claim are my privileges, isn't. They're the rights of every citizen in any civilized country.

What is a right in theory can be a privilege in practice. For instance, in theory gay people have the same right as straight people to not be murdered by being tied to the bumper of a pick-up truck and dragged for a few miles down gravel roads as punishment for the sin of having a sexual orientation, but in practice it's somewhat more of a privilege straight people get to enjoy disproportionately to gay people.

Admittedly that's an extreme example, but I'm just using to illustrate that telling someone, "This is my civil right," is not the crucifix-versus-vampires level of defense you seem to think it is.

Being drawn from the trailerhook of a Pick-up?!?

Sorry mate, but the 1960s called, they want their bigotry back.

What the fuck?!?

I mean that is Mississippi Burning material.

And if this is really happening, then that isn't me having a privilege for being straight, but rather me being privileged for not living in a 3rd World Country.

 

[JimB]

Being drawn from the trailerhook of a pick-up?!?

Yes. In America, it's called fag-dragging. It happens.

And if this is really happening, then that isn't me having a privilege for being straight, but rather me being privileged for not living in a third-world country.

Fine, but do you understand that telling someone to pick himself up by his bootstraps is not especially helpful to someone who has to live with the fear of some drunken rednecks deciding to murder him in the name of Jesus? That it is, in fact, kind of horrific in its willful disregard for the dangers they face and that you almost certainly never will? Because, as I was about to say to your double-edit above, mecegirl isn't trying to dismiss your experiences; she's not telling you they never happened or how you should have dealt with them. She was trying to get you to understand that your experiences and circumstances are not universal, so divorcing people from experiences and circumstances you don't seem to understand in order to judge those people out of context is pretty arrogant.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Being drawn from the trailerhook of a pick-up?!?

Yes. In America, it's called fag-dragging. It happens.

And if this is really happening, then that isn't me having a privilege for being straight, but rather me being privileged for not living in a third-world country.

Fine, but do you understand that telling someone to pick himself up by his bootstraps is not especially helpful to someone who has to live with the fear of some drunken rednecks deciding to murder him in the name of Jesus? That it is, in fact, kind of horrific in its willful disregard for the dangers they face and that you almost certainly never will? Because, as I was about to say to your double-edit above, mecegirl isn't trying to dismiss your experiences; she's not telling you they never happened or how you should have dealt with them. She was trying to get you to understand that your experiences and circumstances are not universal, so divorcing people from experiences and circumstances you don't seem to understand in order to judge those people out of context is pretty arrogant.

I see where we went past each other.

I didn't mean "pick yourself up, you only have yourself".

I meant of cause he needs help, but no matter how much help he/she receives, it wont matter if they don't realize themselves that they can actually do it.

Sorry, the responsibility of understanding regarding communication lies with the sender, not the receiver, and I apologise.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

the problem is you're just assuming anyone who wants more gay representation in games HAS to be an outsider...much like people have divided themselves as "gamers" and "SJW" never considering that you can be a "gamer" AND an care about that kind of thing

So... guessing you didn't read the above thing that I am also in favour of having more representation of gay characters despite adamantly not identifying as an SJW. Also in favour of more black characters which I very rarely see people bring up but that's neither here nor there. So, I am in favour of a thing that I believe has been occurring organically within gaming for a while and I'm aggravated at what feels like external meddling attempting to force through something that was already happening or denying it exists in order to rile up equally ill-informed people.

Frankly, I have a personal sub-category of SJA VS SJW, if I'm not called a shitlord or threatened for having a different opinion, I generally consider someone a Social Justice Activist rather than Warrior. I may feel like you're way of conveying your point is extreme, but as long as it isn't insanely aggressive I'll usually see your point of view quite easily and thus far you'd be an SJA by my opinion (although I appear to be conveying myself INCREDIBLY badly judging by your reactions).

 

[JimB]

I didn't mean "pick yourself up, you only have yourself."

Thank you for clarifying, MrFalconfly. I do appreciate it, as well as your tone here; and because tone is such a tricksy beast in internet conversations, please excuse me if I take this moment to clarify that though I have been disagreeing with you, you do not strike me as a bad person, and my goal is not to tear you down or declare myself morally superior to you, but rather to advocate for understanding. If you think I fail in my goal, please let me know, because stridency in internet debates is a real problem that I think needs to be corrected.

Sorry, the responsibility of understanding regarding communication lies with the sender, not the receiver, and I apologize.

Not at all. No harm done. I think you're behaving perfectly well, even if I disagree with your ideas.

Incidentally, I apologize for the edited post you're reading. I saw an "and" in your quoted sentence above that drastically changed the meaning of what you clarified, and responded inappropriately to what I thought you said rather than what you did say.

The problem is you're just assuming anyone who wants more gay representation in games has to be an outsider...much like people have divided themselves as "gamers" and "SJW" never considering that you can be a "gamer" and care about that kind of thing.

So...guessing you didn't read the above thing that I am also in favor of having more representation of gay characters despite adamantly not identifying as an SJW.

I won't speak for Vault101, but I will say I agree with her interpretation of your stance because you use the term "SJW" at all. It's a term that others people, used to describe people one disagrees with, to make them outsiders, and to invalidate their beliefs; and in this instance, you seem to be using it to describe imaginary people. Can you actually name a person who is complaining the Mortal Kombat series isn't queer-inclusive enough but who doesn't play Mortal Kombat games? Can you name a second? A third? How many of them can you prove exist, and why are you arguing that these faceless, nameless masses are the masterminds behind a sinister social revolution?

Your clarification doesn't really change my mind, because it seems to me the difference between an SJW and an SJA isn't based on any quality of the person being described but rather whether you yourself like and/or agree with that person, which means you use "SJW" as a dismissive insult kind of by definition.

 

[Timmaaaah]

Hahahaha... "Surge"... "So many LBGT characters"... Yea... SO many.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

I won't speak for Vault101, but I will say I agree with her interpretation of your stance because you use the term "SJW" at all. It's a term that others people, used to describe people one disagrees with, to make them outsiders, and to invalidate their beliefs; and in this instance, you seem to be using it to describe imaginary people. Can you actually name a person who is complaining the Mortal Kombat series isn't queer-inclusive enough but who doesn't play Mortal Kombat games? Can you name a second? A third? How many of them can you prove exist, and why are you arguing that these faceless, nameless masses are the masterminds behind a sinister social revolution?

Your clarification doesn't really change my mind, because it seems to me the difference between an SJW and an SJA isn't based on any quality of the person being described but rather whether you yourself like and/or agree with that person, which means you use "SJW" as a dismissive insult kind of by definition.

See, immediately, my conclusion drawn from that is that because I used a certain definition you've now formed an opinion that invalidates whatever I may wish to say. Much like how I have now taken the word sinister to mean you are now against left handed people and so you are trying to "other" anyone who writes with their left hand.

Because I have ascribed certain behaviours to a certain label you now belittle my original point with mocking hyperbole. Perhaps a further question: Can you name anyone who was complaining Mortal Kombat wasn't gay inclusive prior to this announcement? Did they play Mortal Kombat? Is that any more provable or are you going to assert that your hypothetical is more likely than mine? Ignoring that I already agreed my position was impossible to prove or disprove and has already been retracted due to it being impossible to prove OR disprove. This is apparently such an alien concept to the people with whom I am discussing, that I am still being attacked for it.

I'm not sure why exactly you WANT this to be a fight not a discussion but it seems I need to make my peace with this and embrace being enemies.

 

[MrFalconfly]

I didn't mean "pick yourself up, you only have yourself."

Thank you for clarifying, MrFalconfly. I do appreciate it, as well as your tone here; and because tone is such a tricksy beast in internet conversations, please excuse me if I take this moment to clarify that though I have been disagreeing with you, you do not strike me as a bad person, and my goal is not to tear you down or declare myself morally superior to you, but rather to advocate for understanding. If you think I fail in my goal, please let me know, because stridency in internet debates is a real problem that I think needs to be corrected.

Now, as to your clarification, I remain confused. I don't understand how you can claim "you have only yourself" while at the same time referencing civil liberties, which are by definition provided by a support network in the form of a government and the society forming that government. The protections afforded by civil liberties only exist so long as the people who create and enforce them are on your side, which is why the two statements seem contradictory to me. How do you resolve this paradox?

Regarding point 1.

I don't necessarily think you fail in advocating for understanding. If anything I was just a bit too much on the defensive. But this whole argument started from arguing what the motivation was for Kung Jin, whether it was his homosexuality, or his self-doubt. I admit that my opinion that it is his self-doubt that is his motivation is a bit contentious.

I based that opinion on my own childhood memories of being ostracised, which may have been a mistake.

Regarding point 2.

I didn't mean "you only have yourself". I meant "you must realize that you have the power, and the ability to do it yourself". I still do maintain, that the most important step (not to mention the hardest), in breaking through such self-doubt is realizing, that doubt is unfounded. I don't necessarily want to comfort people (appealing as the thought is. I'm a big brother, and my immediate reflex when my little sister has gotten herself into trouble is to try and comfort her, but that is not always the best cause of action), but rather try to show them that they can fix their issues themselves, no matter how difficult.

I don't see it as a paradox, because while the society has a certain responsibility for making sure no citizens will be harmed because of personal characteristics, personal confidence is still one of the most important characteristics. No one will ever hire someone who don't even themselves think they're adequate.

 

[JimB]

See, immediately, my conclusion drawn from that is that because I used a certain definition you've now formed an opinion that invalidates whatever I may wish to say. Much like how I have now taken the word sinister to mean you are now against left handed people and so you are trying to "other" anyone who writes with their left hand.

That's very amusing, but I genuinely am trying to be as honest and direct as I can with you (and I apologize if I've failed, because speaking through metaphors and allegories is a deep-seated habit in me I'm trying to overcome). Would you please do me the kindness of returning that effort and abandoning your irony?

Because I have ascribed certain behaviors to a certain label you now belittle my original point with mocking hyperbole.

No. I am not mocking you. I am explaining to you how you come off to me, and why I think so. Everything I said to you is as literal as I know how to make it.

Can you name anyone who was complaining Mortal Kombat wasn't gay inclusive prior to this announcement? Did they play Mortal Kombat?

The thing is, I never said anything about that. I haven't said anything about whether Mortal Kombat is queer-friendly enough. I've only been talking about gay experiences, so I'm not sure why you're asking me to prove an assertion I never made. Perhaps you think it's fair because you believe you've retracted your statement, but I invite you to do a Ctrl+F search for the words "external meddling." You said that after your retraction, which leads me to believe no matter how you couch it, you still think the people complaining are not true gamers.

I'm not sure why exactly you want this to be a fight not a discussion but it seems I need to make my peace with this and embrace being enemies.

I don't want this to be a fight. I think you're being unfair, because as best I can tell, you're arguing for a form of ideological purity, that video games must be protected from the hordes of outsiders who are, as near as I can tell, phantoms; and that kind of rhetoric damages the quality of the conversation, because it's an appeal to xenophobia and stirs up the worst in people. It's why I think it's important to not accuse a mass of being against you unless you can prove that mass actually exists.

[snip]

Shit, I hoped I'd caught and edited my post before you had a chance to respond to it. Well, let me repeat myself, since I missed my chance earlier: I misread your "I didn't mean" statement, and the paragraph you're mostly responding to is based on a misreading. Sorry about that. I do still think you're underestimating the necessity of support in one's daily life and the lessons a person learns from feeling like an outsider, but your stance is much less extreme than I originally interpreted it to be.

 

[MrFalconfly]

[snip]

Shit, I hoped I'd caught and edited my post before you had a chance to respond to it. Well, let me repeat myself, since I missed my chance earlier: I misread your "I didn't mean" statement, and the paragraph you're mostly responding to is based on a misreading. Sorry about that. I do still think you're underestimating the necessity of support in one's daily life and the lessons a person learns from feeling like an outsider, but your stance is much less extreme than I originally interpreted it to be.

Not at all. I know how important support is. However, you can be as supportive as is humanly possible, but if the supportee just disregards it, because of self-doubt then we're back at square one.