collapse

Author Topic: If this is what I think it is...  (Read 2361 times)

Offline Radical21

  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3023
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2019, 03:19:33 AM »
Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.

The thing is that you very rarely see this type of criticism levied towards heterosexual content.

There are many instances in which a fictional character's sexual orientation has no bearing on the story, merely serving as fluff - but it's only called shoehorning when it's LGBT content...

I think that's a double standard - but maybe I'm naïve to expect people wouldn't be so biased, considering the aforementioned majority of straight people "deciding" what goes, so to speak, in popular culture.

Having said that, I still think it's messed up.

Besides, we're never going to get to a point where LGBT content doesn't feel forced, if any attempts (outside of niche productions) to be so inclusive, will always be met with that kind of pushback.

It's never going to feel natural unless you let it happen naturally - which it very much is, currently, but people are making it weird, so at the same time it's not.

Catch-22. I'd rather we just let creators do whatever the fuck they want. That's what they did with Bloodlines, and what they're doing with Bloodlines 2.

There are not many games that do that, maybe TV and film sure, but games not really. Games like DragonAge or Mass Effect that are known for their pointless sexual content have the option of homosexual relationshops and sex.

In Games like the witcher it is optional but Geralt is written as a heterosexual character so there is no LGBT option aside from avoiding sex or avoiding the game altogether in protest.

aside from that I don't know many popular games with sexual content, maybe Metro but again its a case of a hero written as heterosexual and in Metro:exodus reproduction is something relevant to the motivation of the character so while it didn't need to have an implied sex scene it did need to have the heterosexual relationship.

I personally think V5 should have some LGBT content. There are obviously LGBT players playing VTM so it makes sense if they can find characters that they can better related to in that sense.  but like I said, I'd avoid pointless sex or turn some people's favorite characters into LGBT(Iceman complex) when its very feasible to write in new characters, and the reason for that is precisely the reason for having LGBT characters.

Offline Vaselinessa

  • Fledgling
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2019, 03:52:44 AM »
...

At the end of the day, you can't please both the person living under a rock and the person straddled atop their high horse, so however the developers choose to approach any sensitive issue is really their prerogative...

Hell, arguably the best ending in the original Bloodlines (ignoring the Independent ending for the sake of the argument) has you aligning with the Anarchs, who are analogous to the real-life left wing, anyway. There's already a precedent, there, which the critics on STEAM and elsewhere are very conveniently forgetting. :justabite:

...

I like what Candy Narwhal had to say here for a couple of reasons. Thanks first for highlighting the impossibility of having everyone's wishes met by a single creative work. To me, it's a soothing reminder that when a sensitive issue isn't addressed to our satisfaction, it doesn't betoken (necessarily) a willful hurt.

And if we do find ourselves hurt by some aspect of what we find, I think we'll be okay. Whatever our background or direction, we've been hurt before, and we knew when we went to bed last night that today wouldn't be the day that all hurts cease.

The second thing that stood out to me in the foregoing quote is that Candy Narwhal and I had what I think to be opposite interpretations of a story element: Candy points out that the Anarchs are analogous to the real-life left wing, and my perception of them was rather right-wing. (I'll offer a brief explanation in the next paragraph, in case it may prevent a reader from immediately ruling out the remainder of this paragraph as unfounded.) What I appreciate in seeing how our two interpretations can be so starkly different is a reason to pause and, even when we can't see how another person's viewpoint works, reserve judgment.

Why did I think of the Anarchs as right-wing? In my view, their commitment to freedom from government/governance resembles the advocacy of individual liberty, as espoused in conservative values. Maybe through many a gamer's eyes, that's neither a salient point for the VTM:B Anarchs nor for the real-life conservatives. Surely, we individuals see the world, whether in games or life, through lenses which differ vastly one from another.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2019, 04:06:18 AM by Vaselinessa »

Offline DarkZephyr

  • Caine's Plaything
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2019, 09:41:16 PM »


I am curious to know why those who do take offense to the presence of LGBT content, and I will say "LGBT", as its not a political term, its a community term and a descriptive, easy to type term, take such offense in the first place.  Why is it so horrible to them that other people get to make choices that fit their definition of fun just like they get to do?

Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.

If I had a choice between the same sex content coming off as a little forced or not having any at all, I admit that I would go with having the content that comes off as a little forced.  lol  And as Candy Narwhal pointed out, you don't as often get people complaining about it feeling "forced" if its between heterosexual characters.  I mean sure, there might be the occasional gripe, but I don't think its anywhere near comparable to the griping you get over same sex content. 

Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.

The thing is that you very rarely see this type of criticism levied towards heterosexual content.

There are many instances in which a fictional character's sexual orientation has no bearing on the story, merely serving as fluff - but it's only called shoehorning when it's LGBT content...

I think that's a double standard - but maybe I'm naïve to expect people wouldn't be so biased, considering the aforementioned majority of straight people "deciding" what goes, so to speak, in popular culture.

Having said that, I still think it's messed up.

Besides, we're never going to get to a point where LGBT content doesn't feel forced, if any attempts (outside of niche productions) to be so inclusive, will always be met with that kind of pushback.

It's never going to feel natural unless you let it happen naturally - which it very much is, currently, but people are making it weird, so at the same time it's not.

Catch-22. I'd rather we just let creators do whatever the fuck they want. That's what they did with Bloodlines, and what they're doing with Bloodlines 2.

There are not many games that do that, maybe TV and film sure, but games not really. Games like DragonAge or Mass Effect that are known for their pointless sexual content have the option of homosexual relationshops and sex.

In Games like the witcher it is optional but Geralt is written as a heterosexual character so there is no LGBT option aside from avoiding sex or avoiding the game altogether in protest.

aside from that I don't know many popular games with sexual content, maybe Metro but again its a case of a hero written as heterosexual and in Metro:exodus reproduction is something relevant to the motivation of the character so while it didn't need to have an implied sex scene it did need to have the heterosexual relationship.

I personally think V5 should have some LGBT content. There are obviously LGBT players playing VTM so it makes sense if they can find characters that they can better related to in that sense.  but like I said, I'd avoid pointless sex or turn some people's favorite characters into LGBT(Iceman complex) when its very feasible to write in new characters, and the reason for that is precisely the reason for having LGBT characters.

I wouldn't call sex scenes in games "pointless".  I think they do have a point, which is to entertain.  Not everyone finds sex scenes in video games entertaining, but there are a lot of gamers that do find them entertaining.  I mean, all you have to do is go look at all the mods on the Nexus sites for the various moddable games or the types of mods available for the Sims franchise.  Games that don't have sex scenes as a part of the base game, they get them modded in and these mods are wildly popular.  And the entire witcher franchise is loaded with female nudity and heterosexual sex scenes and I don't think many people gripe about that.  While they did nothing for me, being heterosexual and all, I never did mind their existence as I have never had a problem with human sexuality.  So I would definitely say that they do have a point, which is to entertain those that find such things entertaining.

For my part, I do like a little bit of sexiness in my games even if not flat out sex scenes.  I will admit that I have downloaded the odd skimpy armor mod here and there.  If they had been able to make them available for male chaeracters in VtMB I probably would have downloaded them too.  I have noticed over the years that some talented skinners have made partial female nudity mods for VtMB.  I won't download them but I'm glad they're there for those who do appreciate them.

That being said, you don't have to have sex scenes for a game to include LGBT characters or options.  A vampire game that relies heavily on abilities like "seduction" for instance.  Unmodded Skyrim doesn't have sex scenes but you can have same sex marriage.  There is no sex in unmodded Fallout 4, but you can have same sex romance pairings.  There were't any romanceable characters in Fallout New Vegas but there were still gay and lesbian characters included.  Even when the protagonist is written as straight games can still include LGBT characters.  The Witcher 3 ventures into this territory at least a little bit and the guy isn't evil, which was very nice.     Incidentally, Cyberpunk 2077 is set to have LGBT options which I am pretty excited about. 
« Last Edit: March 27, 2019, 09:49:19 PM by DarkZephyr »

Offline deicide

  • Drug Fiend
  • Methuselah
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #33 on: March 31, 2019, 04:53:16 PM »
...
I wasn't really hoping for examples so the answer to your question about repeating yourself is no.  I was hoping more for an explanation of the word itself.  The word "enforced" brings to my mind images of police measures and disciplinary actions, so I was hoping more for clarification.
...
As promised, a more thorought reply about enforced (whatever)sexuality and other topics.

For the first, there's no such thing as "enforced heterosexuality / heterosexuality that being shoved in your face", no matter how badly some SJWs want to believe so, for the reason it being not only a biological default, but only one orientation that exists in the biological sense. It's improssible to enforce something that hardwided already. From the same point of view, alternatives are but personal preferences that has little to do with it. There are, probably, some genetic or hormonal factors that could make one more prone to switching the side of street, but nothing determinal. Not to say, these theories tend to be pretty weak.

Due to "alternative orientations" being not a biological, but personal / social phenomenon, one cannot simply slap this label on a character without any background or further explanation, so unlike a hetero one, who could be a hetero for no other reason that being a human, by the virtue of biology. This kind absolutely should be properly introduced and dedicated some devs' time to in order to be an actual personality (personal and social phenomenon, remember?), not a yet another forced bait.
This not only makes very little sense in games where developed pesonalities and romance aren't intergal parts of, and also means these characters would receive far more screen time in these than straight if done. So, not every kind of game fits for this.

Now, sexuality without a prefix is a completely different talk. There's so many games where this is done so sloppily, they would be better off without anything sexual at all, so that part would be left completely at the discretion of player's imagination. Coupled with pointlessly sexed-up characters, it's a trve gamedev cancer, which I detest so greatly. Now add the recent trend of pandering to minorities in the mix... You've guessed it. This is an actual crux of the problem, the lack of sexually neutral games and an unhealthy fixation on sex as a whole, not alternative.
This time would be better invested in anything else. It's not all about sex, you know.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2019, 06:25:18 PM by deicide »
The patient was a young lady whom I was loath to disfigure (c)

Offline Signothorn

  • God Hates Fangs
  • Administratrix
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 15176
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #34 on: March 31, 2019, 05:49:50 PM »
Posting as a regular member, not as an admin speaking for the community or steering us in one way or another in this post:

I think a big reason we have conflicts about some of these issues is because the topics have come far too weaponized. I think many people want to shed light on trans and other lgbtq issues is because they want everyone to feel included, which comes from a good place in their hearts. Who doesn't want every human to have the same opportunities and feel like they have a place in society? Others have concerns about how some of these issues will affect family structure, and see the break down of society's culture in part from not having a father around to show a boy how to be a man ect. I think those are all valid discussions that should take place until society comes to a consensus. Then you have the people who pick teams and form mobs, in an attempt to shout people down and push talking points, often word for word from various opinion based websites and "news outlets". That last group are perhaps the worst, because nobody is open to someone telling them how they must speak, and we get no closer to consensus because of them.

Growing up, I had to learn that what I was told about gay people was bullshit, after I had a family member come out when he had 2 kids and a wife. After seeing him destroy himself from guilt, I understood that nobody would choose that path. It wasn't just a perversion that others had explained to me as a youngster, many times using their religious beliefs as a shield so they couldn't be confronted. In reality, the relative's church is what made him repress his homosexuality for so many years, and made him lie to himself to the point that he married a woman and had two kids. Mind you, I grew up in the 80's.

When I was a teenager, I was in and out of mental hospitals, alternative house, group homes and other places like that. I experienced several friends committing suicide, and most from similar reasons. So that I don't drone on about it, I'll simply say it came down to family structure issues of many types, isolation, and co-dependent relationships. This is where things begin to tie together for me with the social issues being discussed.

By shedding light on LGBTQ issues, it does many things. As most know, trans people have high suicide rates. If they or anyone understands they are not alone with these issues, that's a big part of isolation that goes away. When this happens, society has to change in many ways, causing discomfort, and uncomfortable conversations, employment laws being updated, and even some core infrastructure debates, like the public bathroom stuff that I won't dive further into. Shouldn't these things be considered when forming a consensus?

When it comes to weaponizing the topics, people pushing for more equal opportunities for LGBTQ people are often labelled SJW, regardless of their intensity in the debate. It doesn't aid in forming consensus by calling someone a SJW, it' mostly used to stop a debate and tell someone you aren't listening to their point of view. I personally view a SJW as someone who is militant in their delivery. An example, I once had someone on discord tell me that trans people shouldn't be sexualized. Excuse me, but if a trans person chooses to enter the adult entertainment industry, they have a right as any hetero person does, and I don't appreciate someone telling me I can't fap to Chanel Santini. She's a GODDESS imo, and her employment options shouldn't be repressed, especially by non trans people, like the person who said it.

There are also many people who are militant about their beliefs on the other side of the debate, arguing about family structure in terms of parenting, in terms of how young people are exposed to LGBTQ issues ect. While those discussions should be heard, the approach taken to scream SJW just digs the other side in further. Nobody is going to listen to you if you aren't willing to listen yourself with an open mind. They are also often screaming about people pushing issues on them, when they are doing the same. They are sometimes also called Trump supporters to shut down intellectual debates, just like those screaming SJW.

Before anyone would argue that I'm a far leftist rationalizing one side over another, I'll share with you that in the U.S. election I voted for Trump over Hillary Clinton. Not everyone has the same reasons for voting for a candidate. Don't assume that I agree with everything he does and stands for, I don't. Everyone is an individual with their own beliefs, and though it's easier to mob up on people and stereotype, it's much better (though more challenging) to take the time and critique our own views and dissect the reasons we believe what we believe, outside what we have been told who we need to be. It helps us understand ourselves, and have a more productive discussion until we solve the consensus problem. jmho.

Offline Aurelian

  • Ancillus
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #35 on: March 31, 2019, 10:48:48 PM »
Signothorn, human societies come to a consensus through violence. The debate, no matter how polite and humble participants may be, will very rarely lead to a consensus on any truly meaningful question. Human history is the testament to this inevitable fact. You should perceive ideas as living organisms, really. Ideas compete for territory and for supremacy over one another. The great Ibn Khaldun spoke at great length how ideas struggle between each other, and that all pacifism is fundamentally meaningless if not backed with subtle or not subtle threat of violence.

I read a lot of literature on geopolitics as well as philosophy of history. I would recommend you a book, if you have some spare time. The book is called Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? by Eric Kaufmann. The book made great waves in geopolitical circles worldwide. The problem with people who hold liberal ideas close to their heart is that they do not breed at the same level of religious orthodox people. Ideas are carried by people, and if the idea of liberalism can not be carried by its supporters, then the idea will decay and finally die. Take a look at Israel or Turkey, the great geopolitical writer Robert Kaplan wrote of this in the 90s, that liberal and secular Israelis and Turks would lose the demographic race to deeply religious Israelis and Turks. He was correct as we can see today. Israel and Turkey are indeed changing from within by a rising tide of deeply religious.

Funny, Nietzsche thought that God was dead. What a naive fool.



Offline deicide

  • Drug Fiend
  • Methuselah
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2019, 12:24:27 AM »
Funny, Nietzsche thought that God was dead. What a naive fool.
And with strange aeons even death may die (c).
The former god that gave birth to a human is deader than dead indeed.
What we're dealing with today is something begotten by a human who could not hold his shit together, could not face the reality, the godless world. The realization that nothing is real was, apparently, to much to handle, so a human had fvcked himself, giving birth to a god-replica, a worse version of the former.
A stillborn human produced by a stillborn god, and a new stillborn god by a stillborn human. The serpent had swallowed its tail once more, everything's spinning an order of magnitude faster from now.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 01:06:56 AM by deicide »
The patient was a young lady whom I was loath to disfigure (c)

Offline Aurelian

  • Ancillus
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #37 on: April 01, 2019, 12:33:36 AM »
And with strange aeons even death may die (c).
The former god that gave birth to a human is deader than dead indeed.
What we're dealing with today is something begotten by a human who could not hold his shit together and could not face reality, the godless world. The realization that nothing is real was, apparently, to much to handle, so a human had fvcked himself, giving birth to a god-replica, a worse version of the former. The most probably, once more...

In the West? Perhaps.

But how would you ever deal with Allah and the perfection of monotheism that is made manifest in Islam, my friend?

Islam is a thing of beauty, so many social and religious rules that all act as cogwheels. All those cogwheels serve a higher purpose, to expand the lands Ummah until the whole world bows to one faith alone.




Offline deicide

  • Drug Fiend
  • Methuselah
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #38 on: April 01, 2019, 01:30:08 AM »
Their power of rules might prove to be their undoing, this system was designed for Dark Ages, and it does not adapt to changes very well. It works while the situation is covered by a pre-developed protocol, but in modern world situations for which these are no protocols in Quaran have become more than possible.

I once had someone on discord tell me that trans people shouldn't be sexualized. Excuse me, but if a trans person chooses to enter the adult entertainment industry, they have a right as any hetero person does, and I don't appreciate someone telling me I can't fap to Chanel Santini. She's a GODDESS imo, and her employment options shouldn't be repressed, especially by non trans people, like the person who said it.
Your example is beyond misleading for the unfamiliar public, a transgender girl it's not, but what's called she-dude / shemale or ladyboy. Actual transgirls sell their family jewels, in some cases even before hormonal replacement. This is the reason they aren't popular in the industry at all, no substantial difference against non-trans ones, nothing exotic, you won't guess unless being told so.

Personally, what I've found appealing about this public, I mean actual full-on transgirls, not Bangkok style traps like your example, so unlike other letters in LGBT, they demand no special treatment aka "state of exception", want to be accepted into an existing crowd, not create a new one.
In short, the health insurance to cover their case and the society to treat them like a genetic ones. Seems more than reasonable even from a homophobic point of view.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 02:43:49 AM by deicide »
The patient was a young lady whom I was loath to disfigure (c)

Offline Signothorn

  • God Hates Fangs
  • Administratrix
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 15176
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #39 on: April 01, 2019, 09:38:41 AM »
Their power of rules might prove to be their undoing, this system was designed for Dark Ages, and it does not adapt to changes very well. It works while the situation is covered by a pre-developed protocol, but in modern world situations for which these are no protocols in Quaran have become more than possible.

I once had someone on discord tell me that trans people shouldn't be sexualized. Excuse me, but if a trans person chooses to enter the adult entertainment industry, they have a right as any hetero person does, and I don't appreciate someone telling me I can't fap to Chanel Santini. She's a GODDESS imo, and her employment options shouldn't be repressed, especially by non trans people, like the person who said it.
Your example is beyond misleading for the unfamiliar public, a transgender girl it's not, but what's called she-dude / shemale or ladyboy. Actual transgirls sell their family jewels, in some cases even before hormonal replacement. This is the reason they aren't popular in the industry at all, no substantial difference against non-trans ones, nothing exotic, you won't guess unless being told so.



Without getting into the weeds on the definition of who is trans and who isn't, that wasn't my point. The point was about who has the authority over what a grown adult can sexualize in their head, about another grown adult. If someone tells me I'm not allowed to sexualize another grown adult, I'll have a problem with that. Especially in the U.S. where I reside, people don't like being told what to do or what to believe in an authoritarian tone. Some younger grown men are into women who are 70+. I don't see a difference. If a trans woman dresses like she wants to be noticed like any other person, maybe she does! Who is anyone else in society to tell anyone else that they aren't allowed to notice? Who are they to decide for the trans person what is best for them? Relationships often start with sexual attraction, and I believe it should be left up to the individual to decide what is best for them and leads them to happiness. If the individual trans person doesn't like someone hitting on them, they can say so like anyone else imo, they don't need help in that way.

Offline DarkZephyr

  • Caine's Plaything
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #40 on: April 01, 2019, 12:25:02 PM »
As promised, a more thorought reply about enforced (whatever)sexuality and other topics.
For the first, there's no such thing as "enforced heterosexuality / heterosexuality that being shoved in your face", no matter how badly some SJWs want to believe so

Thank you for taking the time to reply to me.

I would respectfully like to say that for me and many others, this isn't about "social justice", this about one group of gamers enjoying when games include content that they consider fun (whether they're LGBT or heterosexual cis women) and another group of gamers having a big problem with it, even when its content they barely have to touch or don't even have to touch it at all.  Its no more complicated than that.  I would like to point out that I find the term "SJW" gets batted about way too easily.  The fact that I enjoy LGBT content in a game or take part in discussions about it on the side of approving of it doesn't make me a "Social Justice Warrior".  I don't know if you mistakenly assume that I am a "Social Justice Warrior" or if you don't see me that way and are just randomly bringing them up simply for the fun of it, but with all due respect, its utterly irrelevent to this discussion either way. 

for the reason it being not only a biological default, but only one orientation that exists in the biological sense.

I don't know if you are trying to say that heterosexuality is THE "only one orientation that exists in the biological sense" but accidentally left out the "the", or if you're saying that its only one of multiple orientations that do, but I don't feel like its status as existing biologically proves your viewpoint on this.  I mean, so what if it exists within biology?  How does it follow that this means it can't be shoved in anyone's face?  Oranges exist biologically but if someone thrust one into my nose, that would be shoving it in my face.  That being said, your focus on my borrowing of your own words is distracting from the question I was trying to ask.  As I said to a subsequent poster, if you don't like my borrowing of your words in this instance, you can replace them with "not giving an option to be anything other than heterosexual".

It's improssible to enforce something that hardwided already. From the same point of view, alternatives are but personal preferences that has little to do with it. There are, probably, some genetic or hormonal factors that could make one more prone to switching the side of street, but nothing determinal. Not to say, these theories tend to be pretty weak.

I apologize, but I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. 

Due to "alternative orientations" being not a biological, but personal / social phenomenon, one cannot simply slap this label on a character without any background or further explanation, so unlike a hetero one, who could be a hetero for no other reason that being a human, by the virtue of biology.

I really don't know what an "alternative orientation" is.  You seem to have changed the subject, unless I am just confused.  But we were talking about things LGBT in video games, and most specifically, same sex content in video games, especially male same sex content (as the lesbian stuff in VtmB has never really been griped about much).  Respectfully, I don't know what you mean by any of what you said above.

 
This kind absolutely should be properly introduced and dedicated some devs' time to in order to be an actual personality (personal and social phenomenon, remember?), not a yet another forced

Since I don't quite understand what you're talking about I can't really reply to this.
 
 
This not only makes very little sense in games where developed pesonalities and romance aren't intergal parts of, and also means these characters would receive far more screen time in these than straight if done. So, not every kind of game fits for this.

True, romance isn't in every game.  Is anybody debating about that though?  Maybe in some other thread?

Now, sexuality without a prefix is a completely different talk. There's so many games where this is done so sloppily, they would be better off without anything sexual at all, so that part would be left completely at the discretion of player's imagination. Coupled with pointlessly sexed-up characters, it's a trve gamedev cancer, which I detest so greatly. Now add the recent trend of pandering to minorities in the mix... You've guessed it. This is an actual crux of the problem, the lack of sexually neutral games and an unhealthy fixation on sex as a whole, not alternative.

Sexed up characters might be pointless to you, but they aren't to everyone.  If they find sexed up characters to be entertaining (as I sometimes do) then the point is clearly entertainment.  But as you point out below, not everything is about sex.  I agree.  That doesn't mean that LGBT content HAS to be utterly absent.  Sex is just one small part of it all.  The discussion is about same sex content in video games, and not just about same sex eroticisim in video games.

This time would be better invested in anything else. It's not all about sex, you know.
I agree that its not all about sex.



When it comes to weaponizing the topics, people pushing for more equal opportunities for LGBTQ people are often labelled SJW, regardless of their intensity in the debate. It doesn't aid in forming consensus by calling someone a SJW, it' mostly used to stop a debate and tell someone you aren't listening to their point of view.

First of all, I want to say that I appreciated your entire, very well thought out post and I enjoyed reading it, and I was touched by your story about your family member.  I almost made the same mistake that he did but thankfully I pulled away from that before it was too late.  But what you said above was a HUGE amen moment for me.  Its a huge turn off for me.  I am not an "SJW", I'm just a dude who loves video games and loves them even more when they provide content that I truly have fun playing.  Its really as simple as that.



so unlike other letters in LGBT, they demand no special treatment aka "state of exception", want to be accepted into an existing crowd, not create a new one.

With all due respect, as one of the "other letters in LGBT" I would like to point out that we aren't all uniform in how we believe or behave and I feel that you should form your opinions about us as individuals ON an individual basis. Right now, all I am trying to do is be a video game loving dude who is chatting about video games, and yes, in THIS particular thread devoted to the subject, I am discussing my enjoyment of same sex content in video games and my confusion as to why other people have a huge problem with it when its optional and doesn't affect them or harm them at all.  And here at Planet Vampire, I am not trying to create any "new crowd", I am just trying to be a part of this one.  That's all.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 05:25:15 PM by DarkZephyr »

Offline deicide

  • Drug Fiend
  • Methuselah
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #41 on: April 01, 2019, 09:58:37 PM »
Actually, I did not imply that you're a SJW, and if you're picking on words choice and into semantics that much, why you've so conviniently forgotten that I've added "some"? Congrats, from now you've began to sound exactly like a "SJW stereotype"... and someone else as well, complete with my post torn apart to quotes. There was no need, it wasn't that big. Certainly it wasn't intentional, but still looks so. Likewise no need to repeat how much you respect me while forcing me to make my way through my own quotes from previous message phrase by phrase, at the same time. Like I have a memory problem or so. We're talking basic forum ethics here, and if you say the "respect" word that often, for the first and foremost, show me some actual respect, dude, thank you sincerely.

"The" word issue. Nothing but word games again.
To cut it short, there is no such a thing as biological homosexuality. One cannot be born like that, only become by choice. Therefore, a character does not need no reason, nor explanation, nor background for being heterosexual, but not vice versa. What's so hard to get?

As for the rest, it's ridiculous, it doesn't seem like you have a problem understanding what you like. That misunderstanding is suspiciously selective, looks more like an excuse to quote my words and twist them around. I'm sure that you did not mean it, but I don't need nor a translator nor an interpreter. In my humble opinion, other readers also, so would you mind leaving my words alone? Thanks in advance.

P.S. To Signothorn, what I've meant, a ton of people who aren't educated on the topic are reading this and might get you wrong.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 10:17:17 PM by deicide »
The patient was a young lady whom I was loath to disfigure (c)

Offline DarkZephyr

  • Caine's Plaything
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #42 on: April 02, 2019, 02:13:20 AM »
Actually, I did not imply that you're a SJW, and if you're picking on words choice and into semantics that much, why you've so conviniently forgotten that I've added "some"? Congrats, from now you've began to sound exactly like a "SJW stereotype"... and someone else as well, complete with my post torn apart to quotes. There was no need, it wasn't that big. Certainly it wasn't intentional, but still looks so. Likewise no need to repeat how much you respect me while forcing me to make my way through my own quotes from previous message phrase by phrase, at the same time. Like I have a memory problem or so. We're talking basic forum ethics here, and if you say the "respect" word that often, for the first and foremost, show me some actual respect, dude, thank you sincerely.

"The" word issue. Nothing but word games again.
To cut it short, there is no such a thing as biological homosexuality. One cannot be born like that, only become by choice. Therefore, a character does not need no reason, nor explanation, nor background for being heterosexual, but not vice versa. What's so hard to get?

As for the rest, it's ridiculous, it doesn't seem like you have a problem understanding what you like. That misunderstanding is suspiciously selective, looks more like an excuse to quote my words and twist them around. I'm sure that you did not mean it, but I don't need nor a translator nor an interpreter. In my humble opinion, other readers also, so would you mind leaving my words alone? Thanks in advance.

P.S. To Signothorn, what I've meant, a ton of people who aren't educated on the topic are reading this and might get you wrong.

I am not a Social Justice Warrior.  Lets just make that point VERY clear and get it out of the way once and for all.  You don't have to congratulate me on coming off like one because I am NOT one.  Point blank period.  Thanks.
 
I was not playing word games.  Frankly I feel that your accusation of word games is a word game.  My question was meant to be very straight forward and so I made the correction to clarify that further, not to play word games.  I think you know that.

I reiterated my respect so that you didn't think my disagreements with you were a sign of disdain.  I have to believe that you have communicated on social media and in forums like this for some time now and have experienced the types of problems simple misunderstandings can lead to.  I sure have and I like to avoid such misunderstandings if I can help it. 

I was not being "selective" in my understanding.  I just didn't totally understand your sentence structure or garbled words in that portion of your post.  And I have never in my life heard of "alternative sexuality".  I don't think it exists.

I usually respond to posts point by point and quote them when I do so.  That is not anything special I did with regard to you.  Its simply how I usually do it.  There is no need for you to read anything into it.  Its how *I* like to do it.  Its not about whether or not the person I am responding to is forgetful. 

The final thing I will respond to in this post are your words about homosexuality and choice.  All I will say is that I firmly believe that you're absolutely wrong and your words could quite easily be interpreted as blatantly homophobic by some.  I absolutely did not choose to be gay.  However, if homosexuality really is a choice, that would mean that heterosexuality is a choice as well.  Why?  Because those who don't choose to be homosexual would have to consciously make the choice NOT to be homosexual, wouldn't they?  AKA they are choosing to be heterosexual.  If you have to consciously choose to be homosexual, you have to consciously choose to be heterosexual.  If you say to yourself "No sir, I am not choosing to be homosexual!" that in of itself is a choice to be heterosexual.  If heterosexuality is NOT a choice then homosexuality is not a choice.  Period.  Ironically, your argument implies not that heterosexuality is the default but that pansexuality is.  If its so darn easy to choose to be gay when you start off as straight, then pansexuality or sexual fluidity must be the default.  Not caring what a person's sex or gender identity is must be how we start out until we decide what it is that we want to care about.

That being said...so what if it WAS a choice? Lets say for the sake of your argument that its a choice. So what if homosexuality, bisexuality, heterosexuality, asexuality, pansexuality etc...were all choices?  Heck, so what if all of them *except* heterosexuality were choices and heterosexuality wasn't a choice?  What does that have to do with the price of tea in china?  Is your argument that same sex romantic content shouldn't appear in video games because being gay, bisexual or pansexual is an illegitimate choice?  A bad choice?  Otherwise...I don't see what point you are trying to make and it doesn't really answer my question at all.  Whether its a choice or not is irrelevant, whether is "biological" or not is irrelevant. 
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 02:26:03 AM by DarkZephyr »

Offline deicide

  • Drug Fiend
  • Methuselah
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #43 on: April 02, 2019, 12:15:32 PM »
Then I'm glad I have mistaken about you. I think it finely illustrates the point, such a style of communication you've used in the previous post could be (and the most certainly will be) mistaken for an attempt to drown someone's arguments by redunant information overload (a demagogy technique), far more readily than mine for homophobic.
Just ask away if did not understand something, I will try to clarify what I said.

You know what's the most ironic of it all? Even if I would intend to call someone SJW for real, from me it wouldn't be an implicit insult. Though I don't belong to any movement, in many aspects I'm more a SJW than the most of people who being labelled so. It's almost as if I'm a dissident to the whole mankind, not a proud member of some warrior caste, but a lone Rambo, if you get my metaphor. In fact, although I'm not gay and don't have any peculiar tastes in this matter, I'm considered far worse than gay by many. Once the people get to know me a little, they get that itch to destroy or, at least, attack me, like I'm not a human, but some alien abomination who wears a human skin, a fiend in a word. And not that I'm outwardly weird, offensive, confrontative or even impolite. For no other reason than they feel that me is someone... something different to that was supposed to be (in their eyes).

I could word everything rhetorically and logically perfectly (and I'm actually do so in my native language), but people are still going haywire not because of WHAT I say, but the WAY I say, subtle manneurisms, manner of speech, an expression (or, rather, lack thereof). They tend to react like they meet a living Hannibal Lecter or a Sith Lord from Star Wars.
I believe that's the right way to put it.

What I was driving at, the transgender movement showcases the true nature of such a movements the best: they aren't a separatist society inside the society that demands to acknowledge its autonomy, they strive to be a valid part of it. They have some needs the society should attend to in order to fullfill that, pretty much like everyone else. For example, I have a need in well-fit (no armpit bags please) and comfortable clothes that won't irritate and distract me in order to function effectively, in society as well. Gender, from this perspective, could be considered clothes that one cannot change so simply or even take off, so I totally get why the suicide rate among these people is as high.
Other letters in "LGBT", aren't so obvious for someone unfamiliar, but if boiled down to the core are similar in this respect.

From an outsider's point of view (whom I can consider myself), the biggest internal problem in LGBT movement is a loud, vocal, overdemanding and commercialized minority inside a minority that dominates mass media and makes a bad name for the bulk, one of the sources of SJW / gay stereotype. This minority of minority is the least prominent among transgender crowd (at least was until recent developments), which is an important reason I've found them more appealing than the rest.

The fun occurrence, Pantera once were going to dedicate a song to this, named Piss. It was being written circa 1992, but never fleshed out. The WIP version wasn't released until 2012.
Contrary to the popular belief, it's not a bully song or an anti-SJW hymn, it's exactly about these people who parasite on and ruin the very same cause they apparently stand for. The most probably they abandoned it in 1992 for the reason that the public would certainly get it wrong.

Quote
The kinda guy that would steal your cast
And buy a burning house
Then call you up and invite you in
And jerk you off with a sandpaper hand
Imagine this part sang from the point view of a gay, it falls right into the place.

About the choice... I got what you mean, to me it sounds like your personality was shaped by outside circumstances, a combination of personal traits and life experience. Probably, some non-determinal biological / genetic  factors contributed and aggraviated the effect as well. Make no mistake, not by biology, by the society (in the broad sense), in a word. Yet there's always a choice to follow the society's lead, to embrace or to defy it. Not that I condone anyone for any choice about this.
This is the paradox of society. It first influences and shapes us in the most wild and unpredictable ways, then it's the first to complain that we came out wrong, not unlike a certain kind of parents.

This is why history and background are so important for this kind of character: devs need to show how exactly his personalty was shaped and why he ended up like this, otherwise it will feel unconvincing and forced. Pandering, to put in differently.

In this light, "heterosexuality by choice" is a kind of double flip. Initial biological blank state (hetero) -> homosexuality (as a result of society's influence) -> hetero (by a deliberate choice).
Conversely, in my case it's not such a deliberate choice, but a simple acknowledgement of a said initial state. I see no gain for me in trying anything, ehm, funny, quite the contrary, that's all.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2019, 02:02:44 PM by deicide »
The patient was a young lady whom I was loath to disfigure (c)

Offline Aurelian

  • Ancillus
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: If this is what I think it is...
« Reply #44 on: April 02, 2019, 04:06:23 PM »
I do not claim to be a master on the subject you two are debating. As I said before, I read a few scientific studies over the years but that is all. However, all of them agreed that homosexuality itself is entirely rooted in biology.