PlanetVampire.com Forum

General Category => Off Topic => Topic started by: Gossamer on March 23, 2019, 02:37:57 AM

Title: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Gossamer on March 23, 2019, 02:37:57 AM
https://www.resetera.com/threads/vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2-taking-a-firm-political-progressive-stance-standing-for-lgbt-rights-mental-illness-representation.106919/
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Mond_Blutgut on March 23, 2019, 02:46:52 AM
I guess youtube.com/watch?v=RNJ9pet2scY&t=42 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNJ9pet2scY&t=42).
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkProphet on March 23, 2019, 02:51:05 AM
https://www.resetera.com/threads/vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2-taking-a-firm-political-progressive-stance-standing-for-lgbt-rights-mental-illness-representation.106919/

So...they want me to pay them to tell me that I'm a terrible person because I don't have a Caitlyn Jenner shrine in my home? D':
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Gossamer on March 23, 2019, 02:55:15 AM
Cool song bro
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on March 23, 2019, 07:37:17 AM
I moved this thread to Off Topic. I made the following post yesterday, which explains how we're handling any political issues relating to the game that have been brought up be a few people. It was in page 11 of the thread, so I don't hold it against anyone for not reading it.

https://forums.planetvampire.com/index.php?topic=7870.msg143921#msg143921

"We'll do our best to keep U.S. politics as it relates to Bloodlines 2 at a minimum at PV in the Bloodlines Games General Discussion area. Everyone who has been around here for a while knows we promote everyone openly expressing themselves regardless of your background or orientation. I don't want a toxic political conversation that re-ashes old stuff and polarizes people. The narrative of the topic is about the game, not political leanings towards WW. Use the Off Topic area for political stuff. I also didn't read in the Steam forums where people specifically said they were Trump supporters either. Let's not open that bag or worms and just stay on topic about the game in a non-toxic and non-political way please. I'm accustomed to the forum basically taking care of moderating itself, but there may be some new visitors now the game is announced that may not get our community. If needed, I'll bring aboard some more moderators but we'll see how things play out."

I don't want our community to become the Steam forums. Keep the political discussions in Off Topic for now please. Lastly, please consider how your posts reflect on our community. We are a rather small community these days, but we have members worldwide who may or may not read your humor in the way you intended, and it comes back at me and our community as a whole. It would be very easy for someone to point at the Caitlyn Jenner comment and say we're allowing transphobia, and mobs of people on both sides would come to people and turn PV into a war zone. Chill with that lingo immediately. We don't need political drama of any kind pointed at PV, we aren't about that. Please govern yourselves so we don't have to step in and govern you. Thanks.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 23, 2019, 04:20:22 PM
I think all of what's been said sounds cool - but calling the choice of clan "an informed decision" is weird to me, like they're redressing a game mechanic to seem progressive. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but I could very well be overinterpreting this...

People who worry about the game being political are kind of missing the point of Vampire, I think, besides.

Bloodlines itself was progressive enough for its time, in my opinion - aside from making every non-white character a racial stereotype, and the "being mentally ill is so quirky" vibe of the Malkavian PC, which is an attitude that none of the other Malkavians in the game reflect, anyway.

It was at least inclusive, and made these characters more than just gags by nature of their (sub)plot involvement and the fantastic dialogue. You interacted with them, which gave them depth, and the PC typically didn't treat anything as an outright joke.

I'm sure Bloodlines 2 is going to be as progressive as the original was by simple inclusion of these characters and themes, but by today's standards, meaning they'll be a bit less caricatured. There's nothing really scary about that.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on March 23, 2019, 07:02:57 PM

People who worry about the game being political are kind of missing the point of Vampire, I think, besides.


Correct, and let me try to be as clear as possible. There is plenty of politics in the Wod, it's a natural part of your interactions with others, and sculpts the rules you live by within. My concern is mostly about the forum becoming a toxic shitshow as new people flow in who don't take the time to read about the site's history ect. I can't expect that. I just want people to have civil discourse. I don't want to get into people's heads and try to determine what beliefs they hold either, it's not our place. People should choose how and to what intensity they decide to express themselves, as it sets the standard for the new people coming to our forums. I called out a specific example in this thread of what I meant, and I know the person has been around a while and won't likely have a problem again. What you see in the Steam forums is the normal "pick a side" team politics where people try to convince others by using submission tactics. We don't want that type of person here, let them do that elsewhere. If they see it happening here, they see an invitation. I've been around long enough and made enough mistakes to know better than to let that kind of trouble start. It will be a big enough problem dealing with all the new passionate modders coming here for Bloodlines 2, arguing and fighting over everything you can imagine. Those who have been around since the early days of PlanetVampire know what I'm talking about.  :boil:

Unless we see another issue, I plan to shut up about it now and let the convo continue. If there are further questions, feel free to PM me.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on March 23, 2019, 10:09:48 PM
Gamergaters nuts vs SJW, a drama play in 5 movements:
- developers said you can choose to be not only as a straight white but also other genders and identification and in any case totally optional
- gamergaters nuts outcry SJW agenda conspiracies
- whoever points them they are hypocrites since this is only an extra option gets heavily offended
- moderators bans them for their aggressive attitude and their threads, they whine at the censorship against their truth
- the world slips a small step once again into idiocracy
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 23, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
Correct, and let me try to be as clear as possible. [...]
Sure! I was making a general statement, it wasn't in response to your post. I can get a little bit passionate sometimes, but so, do let me know if I ever step out of line. :vampsmile:
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Raving_Neonate on March 24, 2019, 08:03:41 AM
I generally stay out of popular discussions such as this since I fail to share many of the widely accepted stances, but the one thing I know for certain is that when a person dies, regardless of color, HE/SHE/IT IS PALE. No sjw or rightist opinions here, pure fact and the former wanting to capitalize on inclusiveness into a simple biological or anthropological fact comes off as infantile and weak-minded condescending, while the latter's insistence on it comes off as unnecessarily boisterous ("I don't need to bare my fangs to feel good" kind). To me it is an universal solution: everyone is pale, maybe add a tinge here or there.

Politics of the Vampire is far more interested into serious subjects of power and indoctrination, religion and loss, than gender and other trifles. It would be detrimental to the story to force it: it comes off as small potatoes in comparison.

I fully respect the community standards here on PV, that is why I wrote the post in an neutral stance since I myself fail to see the benefit on going so far left in WoD today. The newest edition is a disappointment for me, but like I said, it is my opinion.

 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: thegooddoctorman on March 25, 2019, 01:43:40 AM
I think all of what's been said sounds cool - but calling the choice of clan "an informed decision" is weird to me, like they're redressing a game mechanic to seem progressive. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but I could very well be overinterpreting this...

People who worry about the game being political are kind of missing the point of Vampire, I think, besides.

Bloodlines itself was progressive enough for its time, in my opinion - aside from making every non-white character a racial stereotype, and the "being mentally ill is so quirky" vibe of the Malkavian PC, which is an attitude that none of the other Malkavians in the game reflect, anyway.

It was at least inclusive, and made these characters more than just gags by nature of their (sub)plot involvement and the fantastic dialogue. You interacted with them, which gave them depth, and the PC typically didn't treat anything as an outright joke.

I'm sure Bloodlines 2 is going to be as progressive as the original was by simple inclusion of these characters and themes, but by today's standards, meaning they'll be a bit less caricatured. There's nothing really scary about that.

Personally, I'm fine with LGBT themes, racial themes, and class themes, considering they exist as real issues IRL. I just hope that we are not forced to condone or condemn certain political stances, and I also hope that the devs don't push their particular views on the player, whatever they may be. Basically, if what you say is true, then that is absolutely fine. There is a HUGE difference between mere presence and advocacy. And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on March 25, 2019, 02:16:05 AM
Well, I've actually enjoyed the republican jokes on the first one.... :razz:
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: thegooddoctorman on March 25, 2019, 04:28:43 AM
Well, I've actually enjoyed the republican jokes on the first one.... :razz:

What about for those of us who see the GOP as too liberal? /s

What does that line change to for Malkavians?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 25, 2019, 04:39:45 AM
Personally, I'm fine with LGBT themes, racial themes, and class themes, considering they exist as real issues IRL. I just hope that we are not forced to condone or condemn certain political stances, and I also hope that the devs don't push their particular views on the player, whatever they may be. Basically, if what you say is true, then that is absolutely fine. There is a HUGE difference between mere presence and advocacy. And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.

I agree - well, in principle at least. It's kind of a slippery slope though, in my opinion, trying to determine what it means, exactly, to push a viewpoint.

For example, if you stumble upon a gay character and none of the dialogue options lets you call them a faggot/dyke, is there an agenda hidden there, or was it just something the developers didn't end up letting you do for whatever other reason?

There would no doubt be people (a lot of people, in my experience) who would take such an instance as having progressive politics forced on them - because, to them, presence is largely equal to advocacy, regardless of context.

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:

TL;DR: We're probably not gonna see anything from Death Mask Productions in this sequel, because snuff films are decidedly risky territory to explore, as are certain other things.

You know what, though? I'm fine with that - I don't think it's gonna take much away from the game overall if they play a few things safer than maybe they could have.

Gehenna is not upon us because there's a gay and/or black person in a video game for inclusivity's sake, basically.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: thegooddoctorman on March 25, 2019, 05:23:55 AM
Personally, I'm fine with LGBT themes, racial themes, and class themes, considering they exist as real issues IRL. I just hope that we are not forced to condone or condemn certain political stances, and I also hope that the devs don't push their particular views on the player, whatever they may be. Basically, if what you say is true, then that is absolutely fine. There is a HUGE difference between mere presence and advocacy. And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.

I agree - well, in principle at least. It's kind of a slippery slope though, in my opinion, trying to determine what it means, exactly, to push a viewpoint.

For example, if you stumble upon a gay character and none of the dialogue options lets you call them a faggot/dyke, is there an agenda hidden there, or was it just something the developers didn't end up letting you do for whatever other reason?

There would no doubt be people (a lot of people, in my experience) who would take such an instance as having progressive politics forced on them - because, to them, presence is largely equal to advocacy, regardless of context.

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:

TL;DR: We're probably not gonna see anything from Death Mask Productions in this sequel, because snuff films are decidedly risky territory to explore, as are certain other things.

You know what, though? I'm fine with that - I don't think it's gonna take much away from the game overall if they play a few things safer than maybe they could have.

Gehenna is not upon us because there's a gay and/or black person in a video game for inclusivity's sake, basically.

Well, Damsel's an outright Commie, but Skelter is a little critical of Damsel for that given his 'Nam Vet background. I've actually had people encourage me to play a Ventrue Anarch with fascist tendencies, given my playstyle.

Regardless, yeah, politics has gotten too polarizing and personal. I blame social media.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on March 25, 2019, 05:35:21 AM
And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.
Myself consider psychiatry and psychology nothing but pseudo-disciplines and a huge rack, for this very reason found a Malkavian PC who is a walking parody on both plus common stereotypes so funny. This stuff is overused, still in this particular case it was done genuinely nice. Nothing beats a well-twisted stereotype.

As for another question, I'm ok with gay characters in videogames as long as it isn't enforced or somehow shoved in my face (like an infamous Anders from DA2), but I'm strongly against LGBT characters, for the reason that LGBT (as opposed to gay or anything else) means exactly that - a walking agenda.
On the other hand, I certainly would not be amused should someone prevent me from playing a homophobic character, or every WT goon would be, uh, progressive. That fvcking trend of twisting words into LGBT terms, which I detest so greatly. Due to them, you cannot say "progressive" without explaining that you don't mean shit these days. Wouldn't they mind to keep their moonspeak to themselves?
Mira from Bloodlines won't be Mira shouldn't she call a she-PC a dyke at her advances.

Speaking of snowflakes, Candy Narwhal, you're not the only oddball here, I don't identify myself below the belt (with my gender, in other words), nor with my name, legal or otherwise, nor with usual bunch of stuff the most of people identify themselves with. So, there's no flag for me, and if I were to take my real form, I would have to somehow turn myself into a black hole that consumes what's called reality itself.

By the way, I don't even get why the transgender scene is a part of LGBT. Since biological gender is so malleable, being unhappy with it is no bigger deal than being unhappy with one's nose shape or a desire to do a face lift, to me.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 25, 2019, 07:00:49 AM
As for another question, I'm ok with gay characters in videogames as long as it isn't enforced or somehow shoved in my face (like an infamous Anders from DA2), but I'm strongly against LGBT characters, for the reason that LGBT (as opposed to gay or anything else) means exactly that - a walking agenda.

Speaking of snowflakes, Candy Narwhal, you're not the only oddball here, I don't identify myself below the belt (with my gender, in other words), nor with my name, legal or otherwise, nor with usual bunch of stuff the most of people identify themselves with. So, there's no flag for me, and if I were to take my real form, I would have to somehow turn myself into a black hole that consumes what's called reality itself.

Do you consider yourself a walking agenda, then, since gender non-conformity as a concept generally falls under the umbrella of LGBT identities?

I'm not sure why you would conflate LGBT identity with LGBT politics to begin with - isn't it just simpler to say that you don't identify with the movement?

This is kind of exactly what I was talking about, anyway - the fact that people consolidate identity and politics to the point where identity politics have replaced nearly all forms of meaningful discourse.

As such, everything that one doesn't agree with becomes a personal attack. And, that seems to be a willful interpretation in many cases, to me - since most people, whom I've met at least, know that just because you're in the same "category" as someone else, in terms of lifestyle or whatever, doesn't mean you have to share opinions or interests for that sake.

I'm not a walking statement of any kind, and neither are you, and I'm sure we both don't appreciate the implication that we would be, for whatever reason. We're just people.

I find Pride parades offensive because they've become nothing more than a way for businesses to claim "allyship" so they can market themselves to a niche group. You, on the flipside, might find them offensive because they're a vehicle for a political agenda - which I would have to disagree with, then, because if anything, I don't think they're political enough, anymore. :vampwink:

I can understand not wanting to align with the LGBT community, though. For the most part, I don't either, because I find there's often a palpably false sense of fraternity that I don't want anything to do with, but that's a monologue for a different thread...

(then again, I can see the benefits for people who need a sense of community, who would otherwise feel shut out of society - and I respect that, there's just nothing for me personally to gain from associating myself with these circles, because I feel more at home elsewhere, or even by myself)

EDIT: To be fair, I think the only reason why the T is in LGBT, is because society used to think trans people were just mentally ill gay people - or people with two different mental illnesses, for that matter, depending on who you asked.

It's not like gay people "absorbed" trans people into their circles, it's more that these two communities were just grouped together by everyone else, due to a historically limited understanding of gender versus sexuality.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on March 25, 2019, 09:40:32 AM
Do you consider yourself a walking agenda, then, since gender non-conformity as a concept generally falls under the umbrella of LGBT identities?

I'm not sure why you would conflate LGBT identity with LGBT politics to begin with - isn't it just simpler to say that you don't identify with the movement?
Ha! Exactly like a Camarilla, who claim that everyone belongs to it regardless want they or not. People are only people, but communities and movements are the whole different matter - they have guidelines, politics, and, consequently, agendas, hence the differentiation. This abbreviation today is not much an umbrella term for gender non-conformity, but denotes a certain movement.

And why do you think this could be even pigeonholed into the "gender non-conformity" term? What I meant, I don't consider gender a defining or important part of me, no more, no less, otherwise I'm utterly "boring", in an another euphemistic term. Yep, I have one and it has some limited uses, pretty much like a legal name, but that is that.
There's a huge difference between concepts of "having a [whatever] identity" and "identifying oneself with [whatever]" that almost everyone equates. In this case, I do have a gender identity, but not identify myself with my gender for the reason that it has little to no importance in an almost every context.
Like, were you ever asked a name while, for example, on LSD? I would reply "fvck you, my name is not me". The proper question will be "how I may address you?" or "what's your legal name?" (if it has any importance in a context). The same rings true for a gender.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on March 25, 2019, 03:32:31 PM
And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.
As for another question, I'm ok with gay characters in videogames as long as it isn't enforced or somehow shoved in my face

If you don't mind my asking, what do you mean by "enforced"? 

Also, how do you feel about it when a game shoves heterosexuality in the player's face? For instance, at the start of bloodlines, we are turned because we are attempting a hookup with our sire.  Without mods or the plus patch, there is no way out of that.  I would certainly say that is shoved in our faces.  How do you feel about that? 

For my part when I first played the game years ago, times were slightly different and such things were part of the status quo that I was (sadly) very used to, so I didn't really bat an eye even though I would have preferred to have my character sired by an male in an attempted gay hookup.  I DID get annoyed though when I explored the seduction feature and saw that there was a lot of heterosexual seduction and even quite a bit of lesbian seduction but very little male/male seduction.  That one dude at the start of the game and then the guy at the clinic (and even that turned out to be a bug and got corrected by the patch). 

If its a supernatural power that vampires have, should the sexual orientation of the victim really matter that much?  Apparently it does though because when you try to seduce that jerk Brian at the beach house he gets irritated and seemingly grossed out if your character is male.  Apparently natural sexual orientation trumps supernatural powers of persuasion when it comes to male same sex interaction in this game world.  Doesn't make a lot of logical sense to me though.  Truly an instance of shoving sexual orientation in your face in my opinion. 

Heterosexuality gets shoved in player faces all the time and has been for decades, so I am always pretty happy when a game lets us make non-heterosexual choices if we want.  And not due to any personal politics.  Just due to the fact that I am a gay male and so getting to play that in a game makes it all the more fun for me.  Fun, and not politics is my motivator in this regard.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on March 25, 2019, 05:20:55 PM
Heterosexuality gets shoved in player faces all the time and has been for decades, so I am always pretty happy when a game lets us make non-heterosexual choices if we want.  And not due to any personal politics.  Just due to the fact that I am a gay male and so getting to play that in a game makes it all the more fun for me.  Fun, and not politics is my motivator in this regard.

Not understanding these are only extra choices who doesn't replace the traditional ones, other than these narrow minded people have never experienced and suffered these painful experiences, it's the actual problem. But it's also true it's impossible to force narrow minded people to change their mentality since their mind cannot process these concepts.... And don't get me wrong: even if I'm a white hetero I still fell anger when injustices happens. I just wish there would be a better way to make these people understand the world other than theirs.

(I hope my english is up to explain perfectly my theory on this complicate issue)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on March 25, 2019, 08:18:21 PM
If you don't mind my asking, what do you mean by "enforced"? 
Should I give the same example the third time in this thread? Same devs, Zevran (DA1) vs Anders (DA2), the difference is so hard to miss it could serve as a textbook one.

As for the Bloodlines scene, that's called a reasonably safe generic. Reasonably, because there's still some people with a distaste for such a scenes overall. There isn't any romance plots here, the topic is played mostly for comedy, it's, thankfully, not one of BioWare games which romance sub-plots are more popular (and, sometimes, given more attention from devs) than a main, so I won't be the one to complain about the lack of extra options in this regard. Same with the abundance of AC/DC women, a yet another spin on a well-known cliche. Moreso, barely a single seduction option does not border trash comedy, not to say even remotely serious.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on March 26, 2019, 06:58:08 AM
Heterosexuality gets shoved in player faces all the time and has been for decades, so I am always pretty happy when a game lets us make non-heterosexual choices if we want.  And not due to any personal politics.  Just due to the fact that I am a gay male and so getting to play that in a game makes it all the more fun for me.  Fun, and not politics is my motivator in this regard.

Not understanding these are only extra choices who doesn't replace the traditional ones, other than these narrow minded people have never experienced and suffered these painful experiences, it's the actual problem. But it's also true it's impossible to force narrow minded people to change their mentality since their mind cannot process these concepts.... And don't get me wrong: even if I'm a white hetero I still fell anger when injustices happens. I just wish there would be a better way to make these people understand the world other than theirs.

(I hope my english is up to explain perfectly my theory on this complicate issue)

I think that in many cases you are absolutely correct.  MANY many cases.  I have noticed over the years that in many ways, many members of the gaming community are a bit behind the times when it comes to acceptance of things like this. 

If you don't mind my asking, what do you mean by "enforced"? 
Should I give the same example the third time in this thread? Same devs, Zevran (DA1) vs Anders (DA2), the difference is so hard to miss it could serve as a textbook one.

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 for the Bloodlines scene, that's called a reasonably safe generic. Reasonably, because there's still some people with a distaste for such a scenes overall. There isn't any romance plots here, the topic is played mostly for comedy,

I certainly don't even remotely get "comedy" out of it, but I respect that this is your takeaway.

it's, thankfully, not one of BioWare games which romance sub-plots are more popular (and, sometimes, given more attention from devs) than a main, so I won't be the one to complain about the lack of extra options in this regard.

Well I appreciate you answering my question as it applies to this particular video game, but it was really meant to be an example.  Can you share your thoughts on this trend in a more general sense at it applies to video games in general?  Are there ever times when forced heterosexuality does rub you the wrong way?

As for the rest of your response, times are changing, so perhaps now that same sex interactions are a lot more reasonable to expect, perhaps they won't be as annoying to you.

I think some would agree that Anne Rice has had a lot of influence when it comes to the modern vampire genre.  She seems to me at least, to be the one to have popularized the notion of sharing blood to turn a mortal into a vampire vs just biting them to make it happen.  In her very popular and successful stories, which date back to the mid 1970s, there is certainly plenty of male on male seduction going on.  As such, I think its pretty reasonable to say that male on male seduction when it comes to vampires could be seen at least by some people as a reasonable expectation even back when Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines was published.  I once read in the older version of the Planet Vampire forums that Troika had actually intended to include more same sex male content but that ActiVision had them cut it out.  I always found that kind of sad.

Quote
Same with the abundance of AC/DC women, a yet another spin on a well-known cliche. Moreso, barely a single seduction option does not border trash comedy, not to say even remotely serious.

Be that as it may, its still a seriously real function of the game, which is of course, a role playing game.  The female version of our character isn't hallucinating these interactions or watching them on a TV screen.  She is actually taking part in them, experiencing them, given the option to choose to make them happen.  They could have just as easily made funny, trashy interactions just like that with male blood dolls for the male version of our character, but they didn't.  Possibly because ActiVision wouldn't allow it.  The closest thing to that that we get is with Tommy Flayton, the food critic in Hollywood if we are male and choose to use seduction on him to accomplish our goal.  But we don't even get a chance to drink from him.  Instead, our only option is to make excuses and act like we want to get the hell out of there ASAP, which always came across to me as being slightly disturbed that we had to reduce ourselves to such yuckiness to complete our mission in the first place.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian on March 26, 2019, 08:25:54 PM
Also, how do you feel about it when a game shoves heterosexuality in the player's face?

I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on March 26, 2019, 09:06:12 PM
If you say there's a majority of heteros I can believe it, if you say at least 95% of people are heteros I cannot
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian on March 26, 2019, 10:23:12 PM
If you say there's a majority of heteros I can believe it, if you say at least 95% of people are heteros I cannot

I read, admittedly a few, studies that did put out that number.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 27, 2019, 12:28:20 AM
I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.

Be as it may that they're pandering to the majority - that doesn't mean heterosexuality isn't shoved in our faces.

This is more often the case with movies, but even in video games, I don't think it's particularly hard to find romance subplots that exist for seemingly no other reason than to serve as cheap plot devices - that is, if they contribute to the overarching plot at all, and the romance isn't just thrown in for the sake of having it, as if checking things off a list.

(which reminds you of how some people attempt to be progressive, doesn't it?)

I wouldn't use the word "enforced" though, myself, since video games at least leave romance up to the player's choice, generally.

At the end of the day, I don't think I'd mind these inclusions if they didn't suffer from poor writing - all too often does a character get introduced, only to get killed off about five minutes later, and then we're expected to grieve the character as if we were attached to them.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on March 27, 2019, 01:00:44 AM
Be as it may that they're pandering to the majority - that doesn't mean heterosexuality isn't shoved in our faces.
Not entirely, a pointlessly sexed-up content means sexuality, without the first part, is being showed in our faces. Since pandering to majority only was more usual until recent, uh, progressive (in a loud whisper: cri$is) developments, guess which sort it was. Nothing has changed, same balls, now from a side view.

Will reply on everything else later.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on March 27, 2019, 02:16:44 AM
Also, how do you feel about it when a game shoves heterosexuality in the player's face?

I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.

With all due respect, for me your words imply that the gaming industry's motives are about more than just "95%-97% of the human species being heterosexual".  Something that I certainly don't actually believe (percentage-wise), but I won't argue with that for this discussion.  Your words also imply that the gaming industry believes that 95%-97% of the human species is homophobic or unwilling to share their gaming experience with non-heterosexuals even if the added content is something they don't personally have to choose.  That the mere optional presence of same sex content is so offensive and such an affront to the vast majority of the human race in such a very extreme way that any game that has it will tank miserably.  I don't believe that's the case whatsoever.  The Sims franchise remains one of the most successful game franchises ever.  Skyrim remains widlely popular, Most complaints that people had about Fallout 4, which still did pretty well, weren't really about the presence of options for same sex romances.  Fallout New Vegas is wildly popular despite the presence of gay and lesbian characters and of course we have the BioWare games, the opinion of some members of this forum for BioWare not withstanding.  Dorian remains a very well liked and popular video game character. 

The way I see it, sheer numbers are irrelevant.  Regardless of how many people are straight vs. lesbian, gay, bi or pansexual, a significant, non-ignorable portion of society still is non-heterosexual.  If putting non-heterosexuality in a game = "shoving it in people's faces" then putting heterosexuality in a game = shoving it in people's faces as well, point blank period.  Its certainly how I have felt about it for the past few decades.  But if you don't like the terminology of "shoving it in faces" (I was borrowing deicide's terminology), then please replace that with "not giving an option to be anything other than heterosexual" and my question remains.  Because what it really boils down to isn't really about "are most people straight", it boils down to "is it really so problematic to give non-straight people an option that straight people don't have to touch if they don't want to?"  I mean we may be in the minority but we're still here and we aren't insignificant.


I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.

Be as it may that they're pandering to the majority - that doesn't mean heterosexuality isn't shoved in our faces.

Amen.

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?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on March 27, 2019, 02:29:36 AM


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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Candy Narwhal on March 27, 2019, 02:47:05 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Vaselinessa 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr 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. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian 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.


Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian 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.



Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr 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. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian 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.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 03, 2019, 02:13:25 PM
That's a nice subtle way you've worded it... rooted in. Not explicitly "determined", but not mere "influenced" either. Not to say all of them had attracted a fair share of controversy and criticisms.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian on April 03, 2019, 02:22:05 PM
Is there really a significant difference between "rooted in" or "determined"?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 03, 2019, 04:15:03 PM
If it can help you extend more an already endless discussion then yes.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 03, 2019, 08:29:25 PM
Is there really a significant difference between "rooted in" or "determined"?
Haha, "deeply rooted in", more precisely. So emotional. Nice try in pandering, but no hat. You're selling your opinion for an immutable fact. Apparently, the scientific community is anything but undivided upon it. Yep, I heard about this noise with what was dubbed "gay gene" by journalists who are into pop genetics.
Even without getting into the science, in not unusual that twins are anything but like each other save the appearance, which would not be the case should we were determined by genetics.

Could I ask you something as well? You ask questions and make nitpicky demands to substantiate a point of view, you want information, a ton of, but share almost nothing in return. I won't be the one to complain about an informational parasite on a vampire forum, and I'm, unlike you, not greedy, I did not mind at all, but this got old. Would you be so nice to stop creeping me around and get lost at last? Thanks in advance, sir.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Aurelian on April 03, 2019, 09:44:47 PM
As you wish.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 03, 2019, 10:59:03 PM
This topic for sure degenerated more quickly than the disco becoming a joke
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 04, 2019, 12:31:19 AM
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.

Being loud and vocal is what got LGBT people their rights.  If we hadn't been discriminated against in the first place, we never would have had to do that.  We tried the quiet and polite approach prior to the Stonewall riots with groups like the Mattachine Society and Daughters of Bilitis, but they never got anywhere.  They were ignored, for the most part.  When we got loud, that's when we were finally heard.  Its what worked for us.

As for the genesis for my own gayness, I don't know how it happened.  I do know that I don't remember a time when I wasn't attracted to men.  I have always been like this.  I tried very hard in my youth to be straight, because at the time, US society was nowhere near as accepting as it is now.  But I do not and cannot find women sexually or romantically desireable. And nowadays I am perfectly happy as I am.  I wouldn't change even if I could.  There's no reason to and I am deeply in love with my handsome boyfriend.  I would hate to lose that beautiful relationship.  We intend to eventually marry, though we have yet to become officially engaged.

When it comes to the history and background... Most people that I know of don't share the same view that you do about the cause of homosexuality and they don't see it the same way that you do.  And most LGBT people themselves might find the addition of a story explaining why a character is LGBT due to life circumstances rather offensive.  For most of us, we just are this way.  We have no story we can tell you about why its the case.  It would be kind of unrealistic to depict that in a game when you can't really point to such things in real life. 

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.

That tends to be the consensus, yes.  And if psychological factors do somehow play a role (something that I find highly unlikely as an actual gay person who knows what it feels like to be this way), the way the brain works ultimately is a part of biology anyway.  So in that sense, even psychological factors are to an extent, biological. 
Is there really a significant difference between "rooted in" or "determined"?
Haha, "deeply rooted in", more precisely. So emotional. Nice try in pandering, but no hat. You're selling your opinion for an immutable fact. Apparently, the scientific community is anything but undivided upon it. Yep, I heard about this noise with what was dubbed "gay gene" by journalists who are into pop genetics.
Even without getting into the science, in not unusual that twins are anything but like each other save the appearance, which would not be the case should we were determined by genetics.

Could I ask you something as well? You ask questions and make nitpicky demands to substantiate a point of view, you want information, a ton of, but share almost nothing in return. I won't be the one to complain about an informational parasite on a vampire forum, and I'm, unlike you, not greedy, I did not mind at all, but this got old. Would you be so nice to stop creeping me around and get lost at last? Thanks in advance, sir.

OK first of all, as a party in this discussion, I have enjoyed Aurelian's contribution.  He has a right to be here and take part as any of us does.  I hope he doesn't "get lost".  I would rather he didn't.

Secondly, I would like to ask you a question. 

If one day they were to come up with indisputable proof that homosexuality and bisexuality were purely biological, would that somehow have a negative impact on your life and existence?  Would that really ruin your day?  Because it seems to me that its very important to you to believe that homosexuality is in some way unnatural.  You seem VERY invested in this viewpoint.  Why do you even care so much?

This topic for sure degenerated more quickly than the disco becoming a joke

Yeah, that was rather shocking to me.  I am a bit taken aback.  I have had to scoop my own jaw up off of the floor. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on April 04, 2019, 12:37:50 AM
The topic was better when we were sharing ideas instead of insisting the other parties agree with our views. We're from different places, with different backgrounds and life experiences, nobody is expected to agree on everything. I've enjoyed reading the thread, just don't let it turn personal when someone challenges our realities. If it gets too heated, maybe step away from the thread for a day lol. Nobody is going to solve a major social issue in society in the PlanetVampire Off Topic area, so let's not take things so seriously that it goes to a place that makes me want to lock the thread.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 04, 2019, 12:45:02 AM
The topic was better when we were sharing ideas instead of insisting the other parties agree with our views. We're from different places, with different backgrounds and life experiences, nobody is expected to agree on everything. I've enjoyed reading the thread, just don't let it turn personal when someone challenges our realities. If it gets too heated, maybe step away from the thread for a day lol. Nobody is going to solve a major social issue in society in the PlanetVampire Off Topic area, so let's not take things so seriously that it goes to a place that makes me want to lock the thread.

Agreed.  Maybe we can just stick to the issue of LGBT people in video games rather than getting into  the nuts and bolts of WHY people are LGBT.  I don't think it really matters for this discussion.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 04, 2019, 04:54:06 AM
When you explained it, I can see the point about loudness. It looks very different for an outside observer indeed. It turned up that a measure of commercialization and emergence of some people who are more into making a name for themselves that actual cause is a side effect of this, not the cause. At least I'm glad that something in this world isn't as rotten as it appeared. There's some inevitable rot on the surface, but not at the core, as I've initially thought.

If one day they were to come up with indisputable proof that homosexuality and bisexuality were purely biological, would that somehow have a negative impact on your life and existence?  Would that really ruin your day?  Because it seems to me that its very important to you to believe that homosexuality is in some way unnatural.  You seem VERY invested in this viewpoint.  Why do you even care so much?
If such a viewpoint will ever become accepted, it will mean disasterous, and dystopian in perspective consequences upon mankind. For the first, it would mean that we don't have any control over who we are, so trying to change anything is pointless. Not only gayness/non-gayness question, but which exactly kind of either one really wants to be. That any other personal traits that similarly contributed by genetic factors (and there is a ton of them, nearly everything about personality has these factors to some extent) are predetermined as well. It will result in a very passive stance on life, which will make people even more prone to mass manipulation than before. The society will have a permanent Catholic indulgence to do anything with us, it will be never to blame. But this is only a beginning...

It would mean genetic witch hunts and genetic fixes for all sorts of undesirable traits in perspective, by which the mankind will screw itself even more, because by the nature of genetics, very roughly, one bit of information encodes not one trait, but multiple and otherwise unrelated (otherwise encoding something as diverse as a human would require orders of magnitude more capacity than DNA provides), the same information that encode apparent quirks and disorders also may encode useful survival traits, not to say, even "undesirable" traits aren't necessary useless.

On the other hand, if genetics would be considered only one of the factors (genetic, biological, social and personal), it means that it pointless to blame people for who they are or "being to weak to overcome x", but also that we could choose how we use what we have and make the best of it.

About depiciton of different people in videogames, especially those who generally considered more quirky than average, in a way we all just this way, and that is that. At the same time, we are results of a former life experience unfolded and look rather flat without this context, more for the public that does not share the same. It's hard to put in a word, "reasons for x" isn't an accurate or even correct way to put it indeed.

As for Aurelian, I didn't mind it back then, because these questions at least provided a device for idea development. Right question is still an information. Not so for a titbit with an aim to present someone as incompetent or hypocritical, like this certain one.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 05, 2019, 11:13:41 AM
If such a viewpoint will ever become accepted, it will mean disasterous, and dystopian in perspective consequences upon mankind. For the first, it would mean that we don't have any control over who we are, so trying to change anything is pointless. Not only gayness/non-gayness question, but which exactly kind of either one really wants to be. That any other personal traits that similarly contributed by genetic factors (and there is a ton of them, nearly everything about personality has these factors to some extent) are predetermined as well. It will result in a very passive stance on life, which will make people even more prone to mass manipulation than before. The society will have a permanent Catholic indulgence to do anything with us, it will be never to blame. But this is only a beginning...

It would mean genetic witch hunts and genetic fixes for all sorts of undesirable traits in perspective, by which the mankind will screw itself even more, because by the nature of genetics, very roughly, one bit of information encodes not one trait, but multiple and otherwise unrelated (otherwise encoding something as diverse as a human would require orders of magnitude more capacity than DNA provides), the same information that encode apparent quirks and disorders also may encode useful survival traits, not to say, even "undesirable" traits aren't necessary useless.

On the other hand, if genetics would be considered only one of the factors (genetic, biological, social and personal), it means that it pointless to blame people for who they are or "being to weak to overcome x", but also that we could choose how we use what we have and make the best of it.

About depiciton of different people in videogames, especially those who generally considered more quirky than average, in a way we all just this way, and that is that. At the same time, we are results of a former life experience unfolded and look rather flat without this context, more for the public that does not share the same. It's hard to put in a word, "reasons for x" isn't an accurate or even correct way to put it indeed.

As for Aurelian, I didn't mind it back then, because these questions at least provided a device for idea development. Right question is still an information. Not so for a titbit with an aim to present someone as incompetent or hypocritical, like this certain one.

I would say most people, at least in the Western World already do accept that same sex attractions are natural.  And if not most, at least half and the number is growing.  I don't see this affecting humanity in any kind of disasterous way. No catastrophic consequences. There are certain aspects of who we are that we simply don't have control over.  Our genetic hair color, genetic eye color, genetic skin tone to name a few.  These are immutable traits and there's nothing wrong with the fact that they are immutable.   I firmly believe, and so do most other people these days, that sexual orientation is also an immutable trait.  This isn't a bad thing.  There are other aspects of ourselves that we still have full control over.  We can learn new trade skills, we can adjust our social skills, we can cultivate our personalities.  We can totally mold what kind of human being we are.  The world isn't going to end merely because we can't control who we find sexually and romantically desirable. 

LGBT people have tried to change the fact that they are LGBT for decades untold.  Some of the ways in which we have attempted this have been horrific and extreme.  One of the worst things we have done (and our families have done to us for that matter) is trust certain medical professionals.  By any chance have you researched the history of "conversion therapy" also known as "reparative therapy"?  Its frightening and barbaric.  Its caused permanent physical damage, mental damage and death has even resulted.  Electroshock therapy (you don't want to know where they sometimes have attached the electrified clamps), forced lobotomies, physical torture, verbal, mental and physical abuse, etc. 

I think outside attitudes are what need to change, not LGBT people's sexual orientations or gender identities.  People are always coming into our lives and trying to hurt us in their efforts to make us change, if you knew what lengths *other* people, non-LGBT people have gone to to force us to change, to "cure" us, you might find yourself losing your lunch, if you know what I mean.

I personally never went the conversion therapy route, but I did try in my youth to "pray away the gay", I tried to force myself to think about women that way, I tried cutting myself and nothing ever worked.  I didn't find happiness or peace until I accepted myself as I am and accepted that I can't change.  Now I am so happy with who I am that I would never want to, even if they invented a pill that would do it.  I would refuse the pill.  To quote Gloria Gaynor:
 
"I am what I am and what I am needs no excuses.  I deal my own deck, sometimes the aces sometimes the deuces.  It's one life and there's no return and no deposit.  One life so it's time to open up your closet.  Life's not worth a damn till you can shout out I am what I am".

Well, I'm glad we're having this discussion, so thanks for engaging with me.  I think I am getting to understand where you're coming from a bit better, at least as far as it comes to why you prefer to believe that its a choice.  I still don't get why many people hate having LGBT content in video games in general.  lol
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 06, 2019, 02:51:50 AM
Exactly, because there is no need to declare something strictly genetical / biological in order to be considered natural. Even if it is the one of factors, not the only, it is. Don't make a mistake, in broader meaning, not "fully predetermined". It could be said, less natural than usual, although, "natural" is such an awkward word that open to any interpretation, the difference between natural and artificial is mostly a convention, so I would prefer to avoid it altogether. Any factor that beyond our control is absolutely enough.
Therefore, these attempts to prove the strictly genetical nature aren't only an overkill, this could ultimately result in damage, if not to the movement in question, to adjacent areas. Even this article on wikipedia is unsetting enough to read since the focus of researches seems to be shifting to so-called mental disorders from the initial topic.

I'm also glad, despite it being more like a confrontation at times. It was worth clarifying some of my misconceptions, a more accurate picture of what's going on wouldn't hurt for sure.

I still don't get why many people hate having LGBT content in video games in general.  lol
Apparently, because genetics turned up to be more fascinating topic. Just kidding.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 06, 2019, 10:36:02 AM
Exactly, because there is no need to declare something strictly genetical / biological in order to be considered natural. Even if it is the one of factors, not the only, it is. Don't make a mistake, in broader meaning, not "fully predetermined". It could be said, less natural than usual, although, "natural" is such an awkward word that open to any interpretation, the difference between natural and artificial is mostly a convention, so I would prefer to avoid it altogether. Any factor that beyond our control is absolutely enough.
Therefore, these attempts to prove the strictly genetical nature aren't only an overkill, this could ultimately result in damage, if not to the movement in question, to adjacent areas. Even this article on wikipedia is unsetting enough to read since the focus of researches seems to be shifting to so-called mental disorders from the initial topic.

I'm also glad, despite it being more like a confrontation at times. It was worth clarifying some of my misconceptions, a more accurate picture of what's going on wouldn't hurt for sure.

I think I kind of agree with you about people TRYING to prove that its genetic, the truth is none of us knows totally for sure yet.  While I think its rather likely that it is at least partially genetic, I don't know for sure and it shouldn't matter.  Its not a choice, I can't say what mix of what made it happen.  Genes?  Hormones?  Nature?  Nurture?  A mixture?  I just don't know.  I just know that it happened and I wasn't asked about it first.  lol  If it comes to light that its genetic, then fine.  If its never determined what the genesis is, then fine.  That's how I feel about it.  It is what it is and I am happy with it.  I am not always happy with how I am treated for it, but I am happy with myself.


I still don't get why many people hate having LGBT content in video games in general.  lol
Apparently, because genetics turned up to be more fascinating topic. Just kidding.

lol
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 06, 2019, 11:36:14 AM
It's certainly a faulty practice to determine what's acceptable in the society through "naturalness" in any sense, which is another reason this trend sets me off that much.

As for the presence in games, I believe I've came up with a better way to vebalise what I was thinking. The farther the character is from an average audience of a game, or the more unusual, the more effort it takes to depict such in way that will make sense for everyone. If an element is familiar, nothing but a simple statement of fact is required, everyone will be able to relate from their own life experience. The same cannot be said about elements unfamiliar, not to say potentially off-putting. For an unfamilar audience, the same will require an extra to make it seem like an integral part of character, otherwise will appear slapped on. Not explanation or reason, but something that will create a feeling of that "life experience" behind so it's not here only because devs wanted. Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).

In more mass-produced genres, like Japanese Visual Novels, it's resolved by a set of genres, so if it doesn't say, for example, "yaoi" on the tin, one won't unexpectedly come across it. Different audiences simply have different games. The same is impossible with normal games, everything's in the same box, the cast should appeal to the whole audience, at least not put off a part, which requires a discretion, at minimum, to handle right.

By the way, in the example I was initially going to provide, the character from DA2, ironically, looked like pandering / being slapped a label on to me despite having a reason and excuse, while the one from DA1 did not. DA2 also certainly lacks discretion on this matter, to the point of the troll-ish joke.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 06, 2019, 01:26:04 PM
Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).

Really, I'm heterosexual and even I can see that they don't have much choice that way.

I think all that could be said on this topic was said already.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 06, 2019, 02:46:25 PM
Should you care to read to the end, there are genres where they are, and selection isn't lacking by any means. Still, tend to be less picky.
Otherwise, everything was said indeed.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 06, 2019, 04:23:57 PM
It's certainly a faulty practice to determine what's acceptable in the society through "naturalness" in any sense, which is another reason this trend sets me off that much.

As for the presence in games, I believe I've came up with a better way to vebalise what I was thinking. The farther the character is from an average audience of a game, or the more unusual, the more effort it takes to depict such in way that will make sense for everyone. If an element is familiar, nothing but a simple statement of fact is required, everyone will be able to relate from their own life experience. The same cannot be said about elements unfamiliar, not to say potentially off-putting. For an unfamilar audience, the same will require an extra to make it seem like an integral part of character, otherwise will appear slapped on. Not explanation or reason, but something that will create a feeling of that "life experience" behind so it's not here only because devs wanted. Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).

In more mass-produced genres, like Japanese Visual Novels, it's resolved by a set of genres, so if it doesn't say, for example, "yaoi" on the tin, one won't unexpectedly come across it. Different audiences simply have different games. The same is impossible with normal games, everything's in the same box, the cast should appeal to the whole audience, at least not put off a part, which requires a discretion, at minimum, to handle right.

By the way, in the example I was initially going to provide, the character from DA2, ironically, looked like pandering / being slapped a label on to me despite having a reason and excuse, while the one from DA1 did not. DA2 also certainly lacks discretion on this matter, to the point of the troll-ish joke.

(Sorry for how long this ended up being)

I think perhaps you might overestimate how shocking and unusual same sex relationships are to most people these days. 

You seem to be an exception but I think most people who have a problem with LGBT characters do so not because its jarring and shocking to find them in the game but because they simply disapprove of LGBT sexuality or gender identity for whatever reason.  I don't think its because they are substantially unaccustomed to it. Not in the year 2019.

Relatability.  I don't always relate to a person based on their sexual oriantation.  When I was younger, I was into the Goth scene.  In those days, if I had come across a straight Marilyn Manson fan Goth dude and a gay sparkly rainbow loving Brittany Spears fan like Chris Crocker's old self, I might and probably would relate more to the Goth straight guy, but it wouldn't be because the Goth guy was straight, it would be because outside of the bedroom and romance we might have much more in common than Chris Crocker and I would have had back then.  I think the same can be said for straight people if reversed.  These days many straight people find relatability with LGBT people that is unrelated to their sexual orientation or gender idenity.  OR sometimes they even do find relatability in our LGBTness because they may have something about them that causes society to "other" them just as society has historically "othered" us for many decades.  In that respect we can relate to each other quite substantially.  Heterosexual celebrities like Elvira Mistress of the Dark, Dolly Parton, James Franco and Nick Jonas have found relatability in the LGBT community for various reasons despite not being part of the community, though we do certainly welcome them with open arms as allies and friends.

That being said, when it comes to entertainment and video games that include romantic or sexual themes, I rarely did relate to the straight characters when it came to those aspects of the material.  Did I care that they were straight?  No.  Was their heterosexuality fun for me to play with?  Well sometimes, if the love story was compelling and well written (or sometimes I would build a female character simply so I could access a romance with a male character *cough* Baldur's Gate II and Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Underdark *cough*).  But not always and I know I would have had a lot MORE fun if I had been given some gay options to choose as well.  When I have those types of options, I find myself enjoying the straight options more too because I know I can always choose the gay options when I want to.  It makes me feel less tense about it.

BTW, I know you are no fan of BioWare or Dragon Age, but I love this article by a heterosexual gamer who found himself  by choice, despite his original intent, playing his DAI character as gay and having a great time doing it, and a lot of it had to do with relatabilty so it fits in well with this discussion: https://kotaku.com/how-i-realized-my-dragon-age-inquisition-character-is-1678673801

I think you should also keep in mind how different the comparisons you have given really are.  On the straight side you have straight people playing a game where there is the *option* of same sex content that they can *ignore* if they want.  There is no lack of heterosexual content for them to enjoy as they ignore the same sex content.   But on the gay side, its usually that we have to PLAY straight when there is no other choice and we can't choose to ignore that content if we want.  Not by a long shot.  Even when we do have a gay choice we aren't usually able to pass over or ignore the heterosexual content because it utterly surrounds our characters even when our character has their same sex love interest.  Our gay characters tend to have to practically swim in it.  But we aren't complaining about it at all.  We're just glad we get to have our gay option along with all that heterosexual content we're swimming in.

If there IS more acceptance of heterosexual storylines by gay people than there is acceptance of gay storylines by straight people, its not because we see heterosexuality in a better light than heterosexuals see homosexuality, its because hetero-normacy has simply been the status quo for SO long.  Its not about "relatability" so much as "I am used to it being this way".  But its "that way" less and less and there is less and less reason for LGBT people to be satisfied with that status quo, nor do I think we SHOULD be.  We are consumers too, our money is real money and we write our checks and use our credit and debit cards too.  If a game developer wants to court our money even as they court the heterosexual dollar as well, they don't owe any straight person an explanation or an apology for it.  That's how I feel. 

Now to touch on the subject of things like Japanese Yaoi.  It bears saying that this is not a genre that is written for gay men.  Its written for teenage girls and young women.  Usually BY women.  Its by women for women and it seeks to entertain that part of straight women that is comparable to straight men enjoying "girl on girl action".  So these subgenres with their names on tins...I think that compares better with porn and erotic romance than it does video games.  Sure we want our porn and titillating literature labeled in this way.  But that is not the same as video games. 


Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).

Really, I'm heterosexual and even I can see that they don't have much choice that way.

I think all that could be said on this topic was said already.

You are absolutely right, in most cases these days and ALL cases in the past, we simply had/have no choice in the matter.  So we just had to work with what we had.  I do have a LITTLE bit more to say about it though.  lol

Should you care to read to the end, there are genres where they are, and selection isn't lacking by any means. Still, tend to be less picky.
Otherwise, everything was said indeed.

In my opinion, the only time "gay" as a genre works in the Western world in video games is when its a subgenre of romance or erotic video games. 

It doesn't need to be a sub-genre of RPGs.  And really there isn't a lot of selection.  I can count on 2 hands the number of mainstream English game franchises that I am aware of that let you have an LGBT character.  I don't have enough fingers OR toes to count the number *mainstream* franchises that let you have a straight character, but they definitely *include* the ones that let you gave gay characters. 

Granted, there are some English indy titles that let you be gay as well but sadly their numbers aren't really all that big either, especially compared to indy titles that allow you to be straight.  And such titles that I am personally aware of are all from within the last decade and mostly toward the latter half of said decade and a lot of them (most in fact) while great games are very simple and basic games, such as interactive novels like the well done and fun "Coming out on Top" or campy not to be taken seriously 2D point and clickers such as "My Ex-Boyfriend the Space Tyrant".  But its really a very small selection.  I own a copy of pretty much every English language game that allows same sex male pairings that that I am aware of.  Mainstream or Indy.  There are probably SOME indy titles I have missed but I doubt there are many. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 07, 2019, 05:57:20 AM
Should you care to read to the end, there are genres where they are, and selection isn't lacking by any means.

I wouldn't know, I skip Yaoi , I did read Yuri manga though.  to be honest most of the time I'd rather avoid sexual content in a manga and I really don't like encountering implied male-male rape or even implied pedo rape in Shounen or Seinen.  Separation to genres is not so full proof either and that goes double for american TV unfortunately.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 07, 2019, 11:09:23 AM
Very likely I overestimate this factor for sure, since the authors would have a hard time setting me off with anything but a crappy scenario and irritating gameplay. So, when something receives a ton of complaints, I might very well misinterpret an actual reason and assume it's all about quality of writing (if myself found it lacking) or unaccustomed public, and for another reason, post-USSR countries are far more conservative in this respect than Western, even today (DA1 was received extremely well despite this, btw), when in truth someone just needed a target to lynch.

I was into BioWare until DA2/ME3 hit the shelves. They were known for anything but pointless sex scenes / melodrama back then, even outfits were tamer than an average RPG. So I can even top this gamer you mentioned: intentionally created a female mage character in DA1 only in order to make Zevran's first assasination story sound more depraved, and then laughed like a hell from the scene, I think I even mentioned it somewhere on this forum.

As for the focus on women audience and seriousness, a fair share of mainstream Western stuff qualifies as well, so this was said mostly on methods to deal with potentially objectionable content, if we're talking mainstream.
To be fair, in every genre or topic, the bulk is, well, the bulk. A few RPGs actually worth something, and so on...

Thanks, that's an interesting reading you've provided, to me at least.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 07, 2019, 12:24:45 PM
You'd be surprised how many times things are well received despite poor writing. For example Love Death+Robots got 8.8 on IMDB probably for SFX since the writing is quite poor.

Female target audience is mostly for series like Kimi ni todoke (I forget the name for that genre), not really Yaoi stuff.   In videogames any attempt to make something for female target audience is usually  counterproductive since women tend to like the same games.  Even games that seem as though they were made to appeal to male gamers, like Tomb Raider, have female fans.



Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 07, 2019, 03:14:22 PM
Very likely I overestimate this factor for sure, since the authors would have a hard time setting me off with anything but a crappy scenario and irritating gameplay. So, when something receives a ton of complaints, I might very well misinterpret an actual reason and assume it's all about quality of writing (if myself found it lacking) or unaccustomed public, and for another reason, post-USSR countries are far more conservative in this respect than Western, even today (DA1 was received extremely well despite this, btw), when in truth someone just needed a target to lynch.

I was into BioWare until DA2/ME3 hit the shelves. They were known for anything but pointless sex scenes / melodrama back then, even outfits were tamer than an average RPG. So I can even top this gamer you mentioned: intentionally created a female mage character in DA1 only in order to make Zevran's first assasination story sound more depraved, and then laughed like a hell from the scene, I think I even mentioned it somewhere on this forum.

As for the focus on women audience and seriousness, a fair share of mainstream Western stuff qualifies as well, so this was said mostly on methods to deal with potentially objectionable content, if we're talking mainstream.
To be fair, in every genre or topic, the bulk is, well, the bulk. A few RPGs actually worth something, and so on...

Thanks, that's an interesting reading you've provided, to me at least.

You're very welcome.  Thank you for taking the time to dialogue with me.  I enjoyed it. 

I agree about the outfits in the DA franchise as well, although for me that has never been much of a plus.  lol  I find most of the clothing and armor to be rather boring in Dragon Age games.  I wish the games were more moddable in that respect.   Dragon Age Origins is highly moddable but I don't know how easy it is to import totally new meshes like you can with Bethesda open world moddable games.  DA2 and DAI aren't very moddable at all, the best you can really get with them seems to be texture changes. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 08, 2019, 05:52:09 PM
You'd be surprised how many times things are well received despite poor writing. For example Love Death+Robots got 8.8 on IMDB probably for SFX since the writing is quite poor.
Considering that the audience in question were mostly jaded Russian classic RPG fans who broke more than one lance over Fallout 3, I believe it was representative. The nearly unanimous consensus was: a classic RPG by no means, still a worthy successor to them, could be recommended to everyone. Very few got rid of Zevran in one or two playthroughs, for roleplay reasons (distrust), but I have yet to hear about a single real dedicated Zevran hater (save blatant trolls) from Russain RPG forums, and no clashes over "tolerance". That's to say, Russian public is notoriously homophobic, so I consider it a really good writing if such a character was well-received.
There were some jokes about unsolicited knives in the ass at worst, or that his personality was inspired by rogue classes players from MMORPGs (such as Lineage II or WoW), who would readily boast how many mages they made suck in public.

Not so for DA2, it was popular mostly among girls who sought a visual novel / date sim / RPG hybrid, RPG public was divided once again. DA2 was clearly inspired by anime / visual novels / jRPGs, and I would say, of the worst kind and worst parts. Fenris seems like a Cloud (Final Fantasy VII protagonist) ripoff, complete with the oversized hatchet for sword with a touch of Sephiroth, and, for the most part, a subpar one until the showdown.

Speaking of outfits, these games (BioWare and Obsidian) were once jokingly labelled Taliban RPGs. Still, these reasonably realistic models provided a background for more flashy, like Aribeth's armor, to shine. Nevertheless, her armor still looks like an armor, one could consider it a dress armor for parades and such, an acceptable break from realism.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 09, 2019, 02:26:52 AM
This is really offtopic, but I've played that game: Fallout 3,  it is not a successor by any means, other than visuals perhaps, but even there it kind of failed on the design part IMO.

DA2 was rushed development from what I could see , many of the maps were obviously recycled for example and there were many things that could have been good if they'd spent a little more time on these. overall a forgettable game.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 09, 2019, 07:08:26 AM
Sure, still a better topic than arguing over the sense of words.
That's true, save no one hurried them - the audience was aware how time-consuming is to develop an AAA RPG title. Likewise, no one forced them to sell their souls to EA or shuffle the team - DA1 met a spectacular commercial success, which could've very well marked a beginning for an independent carrier, CDRP alike.
Only their management is to blame, they used this momentum for nothing else but to to get the best price for the company.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Oscar on April 09, 2019, 07:40:21 AM
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 09, 2019, 11:29:28 AM
Speaking of outfits, these games (BioWare and Obsidian) were once jokingly labelled Taliban RPGs. Still, these reasonably realistic models provided a background for more flashy, like Aribeth's armor, to shine. Nevertheless, her armor still looks like an armor, one could consider it a dress armor for parades and such, an acceptable break from realism.

Realism can be boring, in my book.  I mean, in a lot of these games, I can shoot fireballs or lightening bolts from my fingers.  I can't do that in real life.  But what I can do in some of these games is take a piece of armor, even a super skimpy one, and enchant it to magically enhance the protection it gives while allowing it to remain cool and maybe sexy looking and allow the skin to breath.  That being said, I liked many of the armors in Neverwinter Nights.  They didn't have to be skimpy to look cool.  And Obsidian is the one that designed my favorite clothing item in Fallout New Vegas.  The chain prostitute outfit, male version.   :D

Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?

Fangs in the neck isn't the safest thing, I would imagine.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 09, 2019, 12:20:45 PM
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?

Depends on the circumstances, in many cases no, in some cases yes. Everyone has their own story.

We were all human once, we chose to be kindred , the choice was ours to make . In some cases the Sire manipulated the circumstances that led to that choice or one had no idea what they were really signing up for.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 09, 2019, 01:49:24 PM
We did not chose to be human, we did not chose to be born like we are, moreso, we did not chose to be born to begin with.
Sometimes, I get a feeling that someone unborn (like, who I was supposed to be in the first place) tries to talk or act through me. And when it hits, I'm nearly always trying not to hold back that little red-eyed unborn lord (c).
Not that I believe in supernatural, I think it's only one of signs that I'm about to do something that I really want to.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: El_Gostro on April 09, 2019, 02:21:02 PM
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?

What happens If a sire gets #me2'ed???? :haw:
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 09, 2019, 05:46:35 PM
Realism can be boring, in my book...
Indeed, so I usually use it in an another sense - a logically cohesive plot without holes and pianos in bushes. Not this time, though.
Still, these games provided a nice break from usual sword-n-sorcery style. Armor that looks like a reasonable armor. My only complaint to DA1 was the lack of alternative outfits for a mage. The same is true for DA2, or, at least, was true at the time.
The same goes for ME/ME2. In ME2, only Miranda's outfit was a blatant fanservice. It backfired, many did not take seriously one of the best-written characters by BioWare, exactly due to the damn catsuit.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Radical21 on April 09, 2019, 08:05:19 PM
We did not chose to be human, we did not chose to be born like we are, moreso, we did not chose to be born to begin with.
Sometimes, I get a feeling that someone unborn (like, who I was supposed to be in the first place) tries to talk or act through me. And when it hits, I'm nearly always trying not to hold back that little red-eyed unborn lord (c).
Not that I believe in supernatural, I think it's only one of signs that I'm about to do something that I really want to.

Being born is a given , not a choice ,however it is like that for a reason. the life influences the tapestry , like a cell within a culture.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 09, 2019, 11:09:38 PM
Realism can be boring, in my book...
Indeed, so I usually use it in an another sense - a logically cohesive plot without holes and pianos in bushes. Not this time, though.
Still, these games provided a nice break from usual sword-n-sorcery style. Armor that looks like a reasonable armor. My only complain to DA1 was the lack of alternative outfits for a mage. The same is true, or, at least was true at the time.
The same goes for ME/ME2. In ME2, only Miranda's outfit was a blatant fanservice. It backfired, many did not take seriously one of the best-written characters by BioWare, exact;y due to damn catsuit.

And constant butt shots.  lol
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 10, 2019, 06:20:38 AM
They wouldn't be much a problem if not the suit.

Besides the catsuit, the only other moment in ME2 that qualifies is a fanservice joke, in a dialogue between TIM and female Shepard:
> I noticed a few... upgrades. Hope you didn't replace anything really important?

Since I did not notice any significant changes from ME1, the line cracked me up. TIM is a type of character from whom you could expect a control chip implant, not something entirely different.

Writing certainly won't stave off a lynch mob, but still, it can win some support among people who aren't into lynching, should the issue arise. For example, I wouldn't consider even a part of those #gamegators genuniely disappointed gamers should DA2/ME3 writing been as good as DA1.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 10, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
They wouldn't be much a problem if not the suit.

Besides the catsuit, the only other moment in ME2 that qualifies is a fanservice joke, in a dialogue between TIM and female Shepard:
> I noticed a few... upgrades. Hope you didn't replace anything really important?

Since I did not notice any significant changes from ME1, the line cracked me up. TIM is a type of character from whom you could expect a control chip implant, not something entirely different.

Writing certainly won't stave off a lynch mob, but still, it can win some support among people who aren't into lynching, should the issue arise. For example, I wouldn't consider even a part of those #gamegators genuniely disappointed gamers should DA2/ME3 writing been as good as DA1.

I think for most people disappointed with ME3 it was the endings.  I know that was my issue when I first played the game in 2012 when it was brand new.  That was probably the most shocking, horrible ending experience I have ever had with any game in my life.  I kept telling myself "I have GOT to be dreaming this" and I didn't mean my Shepard, I meant my real self.  LOL Most people that I know of praise the majority of the rest of the game.  Speaking of fanservice I think the Citadel DLC was major fan service and I loved it.  I always use mods to make the party at the end my actual game end, that combined with the "Happy Ending Mod".  lol  I was more OK with the endings after the Extended Cut DLC but I still prefer the Happy Ending Mod.  In my head canon, that is THE ending, and the fact that the next sequel took place far into the future in another galaxy entirely makes it easy for me to keep it that way as nothing in MEA contradicts my head
canon.

Just to bring the conversation mildly back on topic, I do know that a teeny tiny number of players were annoyed when Kaiden Alenko was revealed to be bisexual.  But it wasn't a very significant number of people.  Their claimed issue with it was taking an "established" straight character and  "suddenly" making him bisexual to "pander" to LGBT people.  Such people seem confused with how bisexuality works.  A) neither previous game ever stated that Kaidan was heterosexual, they simply don't explicitly show it in the final product and B) he was always intended to be bisexual from the start anyway, nearly ALL of his male romance content is present but hidden in the first game's files and there is a mod that easily unlocks it, including a complete set of audio files for a same sex relationship with him.  They "cut" that content (really they just hid it) from the first game (and mentions of Thane being bi from the second game) out of fear of homophobic backlash at the times those games were released.  So what it really is an example of, is an LGBT character being sort of (but not explicitly) "straight washed" to pander to homphobes and I am very glad they made moves to fix that in part 3. 

Interestingly enough, if you install all three parts of the mod that unlocks the Kaidan same sex romance content with each game, all of the sound files are present to make it work in all three games.  There is no odd break in realism where you have to content yourself with silent, captioned dialogue.  The sound files are all there, including in part 3 evidencing a same sex romance with Kaidan from the very first game. Originally I was happy with just starting my Manshep's romance with Kaidan in part 3 but after trying out the mod and having the relationship from the very first game, I find the experience to be much richer.  Even what goes on in part 3 is more interesting with a relationship that was previously established, the dialogue is a little richer and a few other little things are more interesting as well.  Its too bad they ever cut it to pander to homophobes.  Thank goodness for the mods that fix that.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Ghanima_Atreides on April 10, 2019, 10:04:11 AM


Just to bring the conversation mildly back on topic, I do know that a teeny tiny number of players were annoyed when Kaiden Alenko was revealed to be bisexual.  But it wasn't a very significant number of people.  Their claimed issue with it was taking an "established" straight character and  "suddenly" making him bisexual to "pander" to LGBT people.  Such people seem confused with how bisexuality works.  A) neither previous game ever stated that Kaidan was heterosexual, they simply don't explicitly show it in the final product and B) he was always intended to be bisexual from the start anyway, nearly ALL of his male romance content is present but hidden in the first game's files and there is a mod that easily unlocks it, including a complete set of audio files for a same sex relationship with him.  They "cut" that content (really they just hid it) from the first game (and mentions of Thane being bi from the second game) out of fear of homophobic backlash at the times those games were released.  So what it really is an example of, is an LGBT character being sort of (but not explicitly) "straight washed" to pander to homphobes and I am very glad they made moves to fix that in part 3. 



Bisexuality is often such an iffy thing in games, movies, fiction in general...it's rare to see it portrayed thoughtfully, even rarer to see a good portrayal of a male bisexual character. On the one hand, too often it's introduced as an "edgy" trait for evil (female) characters, or in order to sex up a female character (Bloodlines itself is guilty of this), which isn't done for the benefit of LGBT people, but rather because it's a straight guy fantasy.

On the other hand, there are people who seem to think that bisexual people should date both/more than one gender at all times, and if they do not they are either perceived as straight or gay. This is true of real life as well, speaking from experience.

Coming back to games, there are also some where everyone is bisexual, but not because it's intended to be their identity, but as a 'catch-all' setting to allow people to romance whoever they want without restrictions. In fact, that isn't bisexuality anymore but a "blank state sexuality" for the player to project their own onto. In a way I can see the benefit in this, but personally I prefer it when characters have individual preferences, be they straight or gay or bi. In Fallout New Vegas for example, you couldn't flirt with Arcade as a female and Veronica responded differently to you if you were a guy. Granted, you couldn't really romance anyone there, but they do make their preferences known and the player cannot change them. It makes for more interesting characters, makes them feel more like actual people.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 10, 2019, 12:36:13 PM


Just to bring the conversation mildly back on topic, I do know that a teeny tiny number of players were annoyed when Kaiden Alenko was revealed to be bisexual.  But it wasn't a very significant number of people.  Their claimed issue with it was taking an "established" straight character and  "suddenly" making him bisexual to "pander" to LGBT people.  Such people seem confused with how bisexuality works.  A) neither previous game ever stated that Kaidan was heterosexual, they simply don't explicitly show it in the final product and B) he was always intended to be bisexual from the start anyway, nearly ALL of his male romance content is present but hidden in the first game's files and there is a mod that easily unlocks it, including a complete set of audio files for a same sex relationship with him.  They "cut" that content (really they just hid it) from the first game (and mentions of Thane being bi from the second game) out of fear of homophobic backlash at the times those games were released.  So what it really is an example of, is an LGBT character being sort of (but not explicitly) "straight washed" to pander to homphobes and I am very glad they made moves to fix that in part 3. 



Bisexuality is often such an iffy thing in games, movies, fiction in general...it's rare to see it portrayed thoughtfully, even rarer to see a good portrayal of a male bisexual character. On the one hand, too often it's introduced as an "edgy" trait for evil (female) characters, or in order to sex up a female character (Bloodlines itself is guilty of this), which isn't done for the benefit of LGBT people, but rather because it's a straight guy fantasy.

On the other hand, there are people who seem to think that bisexual people should date both/more than one gender at all times, and if they do not they are either perceived as straight or gay. This is true of real life as well, speaking from experience.

Coming back to games, there are also some where everyone is bisexual, but not because it's intended to be their identity, but as a 'catch-all' setting to allow people to romance whoever they want without restrictions. In fact, that isn't bisexuality anymore but a "blank state sexuality" for the player to project their own onto. In a way I can see the benefit in this, but personally I prefer it when characters have individual preferences, be they straight or gay or bi. In Fallout New Vegas for example, you couldn't flirt with Arcade as a female and Veronica responded differently to you if you were a guy. Granted, you couldn't really romance anyone there, but they do make their preferences known and the player cannot change them. It makes for more interesting characters, makes them feel more like actual people.

I agree with most of what you say here, including regarding what you say about bisexuality being used as more of a "blank slate catch all" sexuality.  However, I would much rather see that than no LGBT content whatsoever, particularly with regard to male same sex romance options which used to be slightly harder to find than female ones.  Though it certainly is more interesting when the bisexuality is an actual part of their identity, such as with Zevran in Dragon Age Origins or Iron Bull in Dragon Age Inquisition.  These characters aren't "PC sexual" they are legitimately bisexual and you can find out about that regardless of your character's sex.  Zevran is very open about it and isn't nearly as subtle about it as Iron Bull is, but its definitely there with the Iron Bull as well, such as when he discusses what amounts to the Qunari version of brothels.

But again, as interesting as that is, I would rather have the "PC Sexual" version than nothing at all.  While its more interesting to have it be an integral part of their identity, I think abandoning it all together in favor of heteronormacy rather than make a less interesting bisexual character is an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting your nose off to spite your face.   

The above being said, a character not stating "this is just so very integral to my identity, I am ever so bi" doesn't mean that it isn't integral to their identity, it could mean that they don't feel the need to talk about it because to them it doesn't need discussion or justification.  Its just a part of who they are and it doesn't need to be gabbed about, in their eyes.

There are those who don't want PC sexual bisexuals at all, they consider it "lazy" or "cheap" to do that that, but bisexual erasure is a problem in real life, even within the LGBT community and I don't think we need to further that in video games even if the bisexual is perceived as "PC Sexual".   
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: El_Gostro on April 10, 2019, 12:38:21 PM
But certainly discussed throughout 16 pages of back and forth!!!!!
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 10, 2019, 12:41:38 PM
But certainly discussed throughout 16 pages of back and forth!!!!!

So far its 6 pages and those of us taking part in this discussion find it interesting or enlightening.  Those who don't find it interesting or enlightening are not required to participate as far as I'm aware. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on April 10, 2019, 03:35:50 PM
Ashley was also supposed to be romanced by both femshep and broshep, but was cut from ME1. I usually play as femshep because I feel the renegade lines are delivered better, especially "big stupid jellyfish". I understand why they may have cut Ashley's romance with femshep because of Ashley's religious views, but wish it was an option nevertheless.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Ghanima_Atreides on April 10, 2019, 05:37:22 PM

But again, as interesting as that is, I would rather have the "PC Sexual" version than nothing at all.  While its more interesting to have it be an integral part of their identity, I think abandoning it all together in favor of heteronormacy rather than make a less interesting bisexual character is an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting your nose off to spite your face.   

The above being said, a character not stating "this is just so very integral to my identity, I am ever so bi" doesn't mean that it isn't integral to their identity, it could mean that they don't feel the need to talk about it because to them it doesn't need discussion or justification.  Its just a part of who they are and it doesn't need to be gabbed about, in their eyes.

There are those who don't want PC sexual bisexuals at all, they consider it "lazy" or "cheap" to do that that, but bisexual erasure is a problem in real life, even within the LGBT community and I don't think we need to further that in video games even if the bisexual is perceived as "PC Sexual".

To be honest, I find that PC sexual bisexual characters actually contribute to bi erasure, because those characters aren't really perceived as being genuinely bi, they're perceived by each player in turn as being whatever they want them to be. To give an example, SWTOR (Star Wars the Old Republic): originally, all of the characters were straight-romance only, then later on they added PC sexual bi characters and more recently they announced they would update the original characters to be romanceable by both genders as well. Reading people's reactions, I've seen stuff along the lines of: "Ah finally I can make Jaesa a lesbian!" and "Hmm, my male Jedi Knight is going to get quite a shock when he finds out his wife is bi..."  So those people already had their own established vision of those characters and their orientations, or saw this as an opportunity to mold them to better fit their headcanon. In either case, it wasn't bisexuality.

This is the reason why I said I find that bisexuality as a true and meaningful identity is lacking in games, whether the character in question is open about it or more private, because I didn't mean to imply that they should all constantly talk about how bi they are, that's another harmful trope. (I haven't played Dragon Age so I cannot comment on that.)

That being said, I do agree with you that it's better than having no LGBT options at all, and this at least gives people the freedom to roleplay it however they want, which is a good thing. I was just making a point that it takes away from the characters themselves and, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't help portray bisexuality as a legitimate identity.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 10, 2019, 06:02:25 PM
Ashley was also supposed to be romanced by both femshep and broshep, but was cut from ME1. I usually play as femshep because I feel the renegade lines are delivered better, especially "big stupid jellyfish". I understand why they may have cut Ashley's romance with femshep because of Ashley's religious views, but wish it was an option nevertheless.

Yes and the mod that I mentioned above reactivates that content as well.  If you you ever go back and replay the game, you might want to give it a try: https://www.nexusmods.com/masseffect/mods/80

Its the first in a 3 part series.  There's one for the second and third game as well. 

I wish they would have kept it as well, not entirely sure why they didn't.  Maybe they thought an omnisexual blue alien girl was more acceptable than a bisexual human woman at that time? 

Initially I preferred Jennifer Hale's voice acting overall as well when I first played the first game (although I did prefer Mark Meer's delivery of the "Big Stupid Jellyfish" line) but I think Mark improved in the subsequent games and I came to prefer playing manshep over all. I do love Hale's voice work though and its one of the few franchises I play where I still do play a female character.  She's just an excellent actress. 


But again, as interesting as that is, I would rather have the "PC Sexual" version than nothing at all.  While its more interesting to have it be an integral part of their identity, I think abandoning it all together in favor of heteronormacy rather than make a less interesting bisexual character is an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting your nose off to spite your face.   

The above being said, a character not stating "this is just so very integral to my identity, I am ever so bi" doesn't mean that it isn't integral to their identity, it could mean that they don't feel the need to talk about it because to them it doesn't need discussion or justification.  Its just a part of who they are and it doesn't need to be gabbed about, in their eyes.

There are those who don't want PC sexual bisexuals at all, they consider it "lazy" or "cheap" to do that that, but bisexual erasure is a problem in real life, even within the LGBT community and I don't think we need to further that in video games even if the bisexual is perceived as "PC Sexual".

To be honest, I find that PC sexual bisexual characters actually contribute to bi erasure, because those characters aren't really perceived as being genuinely bi, they're perceived by each player in turn as being whatever they want them to be. To give an example, SWTOR (Star Wars the Old Republic): originally, all of the characters were straight-romance only, then later on they added PC sexual bi characters and more recently they announced they would update the original characters to be romanceable by both genders as well. Reading people's reactions, I've seen stuff along the lines of: "Ah finally I can make Jaesa a lesbian!" and "Hmm, my male Jedi Knight is going to get quite a shock when he finds out his wife is bi..."  So those people already had their own established vision of those characters and their orientations, or saw this as an opportunity to mold them to better fit their headcanon. In either case, it wasn't bisexuality.

This is the reason why I said I find that bisexuality as a true and meaningful identity is lacking in games, whether the character in question is open about it or more private, because I didn't mean to imply that they should all constantly talk about how bi they are, that's another harmful trope. (I haven't played Dragon Age so I cannot comment on that.)

That being said, I do agree with you that it's better than having no LGBT options at all, and this at least gives people the freedom to roleplay it however they want, which is a good thing. I was just making a point that it takes away from the characters themselves and, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't help portray bisexuality as a legitimate identity.

I think you and I are mostly on the same page here.  :)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 16, 2019, 10:38:16 AM
I think for most people disappointed with ME3 it was the endings.  I know that was my issue when I first played the game in 2012 when it was brand new.  That was probably the most shocking, horrible ending experience I have ever had with any game in my life.  I kept telling myself "I have GOT to be dreaming this" and I didn't mean my Shepard, I meant my real self.  LOL Most people that I know of praise the majority of the rest of the game.  Speaking of fanservice I think the Citadel DLC was major fan service and I loved it.  I always use mods to make the party at the end my actual game end, that combined with the "Happy Ending Mod".  lol  I was more OK with the endings after the Extended Cut DLC but I still prefer the Happy Ending Mod.  In my head canon, that is THE ending, and the fact that the next sequel took place far into the future in another galaxy entirely makes it easy for me to keep it that way as nothing in MEA contradicts my head
canon.
Troll endings are only a tip of the iceberg. The writing went downhill after ME2, the main plot is lazy and full of holes, many characters not behave like themselves, as if an infamous Domi usurped writer's mantle from the actual team. It's totally like today Hollywood movies with a focus on so-called emotional scenes and melodrama, apparently the public so fond of them that does not notice how messy, far-fetched or even blatantly illogical these plots are. Romances has become the main attraction (or distraction?).
To sum it up, the shuffled writers team and disrespect to the audience, the same issues as The Last Jedi (2017).

Luckily enough, I had a chance to try ME3 on a friend's computer before buying, could not tolerate more than, I believe, half-hour of gameplay.

By the way, I also played with female Shepard almost exlusively, due to the superior voice-over. I don't think the male voice actor is to blame, this kind of generic military shooter hero voice was, the most likely, a bright idea by the management. Female Shepard is non-canon, so I guess they had more artistic freedom with her. I suspect they decided to spice up the male voice-over in ME3 as well after female Shepard had gained an unexpected following.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Azrael on April 18, 2019, 10:33:35 PM
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?

I gotta tell ya, Umnir, I don't even want SKIN on my personal space.

Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Sabbat_stalker on April 21, 2019, 12:23:22 AM
I don't care what or who is included in the game as long as I am allowed to treat them the way I wish and come to my own conclusions about them.

This thread reminds me of a shitty article I attempted to write a couple of months ago and it seems relevant atm and encapsulates my feelings on the matter
http://indiegamer.info/blog/2018/11/18/are-games-political-and-should-they-be/
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 21, 2019, 01:45:09 AM
I don't care what or who is included in the game as long as I am allowed to treat them the way I wish and come to my own conclusions about them.

This thread reminds me of a shitty article I attempted to write a couple of months ago and it seems relevant atm and encapsulates my feelings on the matter
http://indiegamer.info/blog/2018/11/18/are-games-political-and-should-they-be/

I read through your article and I didn't think it was "shitty".  It came across as fairly reasonable to me.  I have never been a huge fan of Andrew Breitbart but he did do a few bold things that I respect, including his big "Gay old party" from back in 2011, trying to welcome LGBT people into the Republican party in the face of hatred from the so called "Family Values" crowd screeching their disapproval of LGBT presence among conservatives.  He did not approve of that hatred, said that it "offended him" and I can respect that.  I mean he did add a caveat that he wasn't endorsing same sex marriage, but still, it was brave and bold and again, I can respect it.  It was a shame when he passed away.  At any rate, your article wasn't shitty. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 21, 2019, 11:08:50 AM
To me, marriage itself is an institution that hardly makes any sense these days. To spend efforts trying to reform something that long became so outdated it could be for practical purposes considered fictitious, makes even less sense.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 21, 2019, 03:57:18 PM
To me, marriage itself is an institution that hardly makes any sense these days. To spend efforts trying to reform something that long became so outdated it could be for practical purposes considered fictitious, makes even less sense.

Nobody was really trying to "reform" anything though.  They just wanted to be included in it like everybody else, and what do you know?  It worked.

Marriage carries with it about 1,000 federal benefits, give or take, in the United States, so some people find that to be enough of a reason to have their relationships recognized officially by the Government.  Others have a more romantic or spiritual reason for it.  Regardless, marriage equality is now the law of the land in the USA.  Those who don't believe in marriage are free to refrain from participating in it.  But the Supreme Court of the United States has declared marriage to be a Civil Right for those do wish to have access to it. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Sabbat_stalker on April 21, 2019, 11:48:42 PM
Well thank you, Dark Zephyr I appreciate the kind words!

The problem with marriage is that it is a religious ceremony with certain requirements that are demanded by the faith in question, with not being homosexual being one of them.

But marriage is also a contract that gives benefits to couples who wish to live together provided by the state and the state should not discriminate or refuse an option to citizen based on sexual orientation. It seems all problems would be resolved if they simply renamed the official state contract between partners as something other than marriage thus completely distancing itself from the religious aspect.

Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 22, 2019, 01:34:16 AM
Well thank you, Dark Zephyr I appreciate the kind words!

The problem with marriage is that it is a religious ceremony with certain requirements that are demanded by the faith in question, with not being homosexual being one of them.

But marriage is also a contract that gives benefits to couples who wish to live together provided by the state and the state should not discriminate or refuse an option to citizen based on sexual orientation. It seems all problems would be resolved if they simply renamed the official state contract between partners as something other than marriage thus completely distancing itself from the religious aspect.

You're very welcome.  :)

I would like to share with you my take on all of this, if I may.  I respect your opinion, but I would also like to share my point of  view and where LGBT people are coming from with this, if I may. 

"Marriage" is a contract with the "state" (as in government), it always has been, even as far back as the Old Covenant if you want to look at it in Judeo/Christian terms.  There is a religious element of course, for those who practice religion, but this is an aspect known specifically as "Matrimony" or "Holy Matrimony".   "Matrimony" is somewhat distinct from "Marriage" in that it is what makes marriage a covenant with the Judeo Christian God and not just *merely* a state contract.  In Liturgical and apostolic variations of Christianity such as Lutheranism, Anglicanism, Orthodoxy or Catholicism, this is also known as a "Sacrament".  Many people who oppose same sex marriage as well as those who suggest using a different term sometimes confuse the concept of "marriage" with the concept of "Holy Matrimony". 

I would like to touch on 3 things. 

1. Same sex couples have never wanted the government to interfere with the religious covenant or "Sacramental" aspect of marriage.  What we have looked for is specifically related to state contracts and federal legislation. 

2. There are LGBT affirming religions including Christian churches that do same sex weddings regardless of the legal status.  The Government is not needed for the sacramental or religious aspect of marriage.  Also, the SCOTUS decision does not compel those religions or faiths that do not affirm same sex marriages to change their policy, stance or practice.

3.  Same sex couples did try the "other name" thing at one point.  At one point we allowed them to give us what I call the "Folgers Crystals" version of marriage under two different names, but they amounted to the same thing.  They were "Civil Unions" and "Domestic Partnerships".  Ignoring the fact that these amount to platitudes rather than real marriage, that they harken back to a time of Jim Crow, and to me amount to little more than legally "playing house", they also carried with them a legislative problem.  Thanks to the Defense of Marriage Act, Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions do not carry with them the 1,000 federal benefits that marriages do.   Sure, you would get the same benefits at the *state* level, but *none* of the benefits at the federal level.  As an example, if a man were join into a civil union or domestic partnership with his foreign born fiance, he could never sponsor him for a green card and he never would have been able to sponsor him for a fiance visa.  But if he *marries* him and the word "marriage" is what is used, he CAN sponsor him for a fiance visa and then a green card. 

In 2012, section 3 of DOMA was repealed.  But that never made it so that civil unions and domestic partnerships or any other possible "relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage" carried the same full weight as actual heterosexual marriages because Section 2 of DOMA remains.  It only made it so that straight up legal marriages between members of the same sex can carry the same full weight as heterosexual marriages.  So when Obergefell vs Hodges was decided in favor of Obergefell by the Supreme Court of the United States, it circumvented what remained of DOMA (particularly Section 2) and made it a moot point.  DOMA still exists, but it carries no real power.  It has been rendered impotent.  But only so long as same sex couples engage in actual *marriage* and not a replacement Folger's Crystals Jim Crow version. 

The man that I love happens to be foreign born.  He is my family.  Together we are a small family unit. We do plan to marry eventually.  If not for Obergefell v. Hodges and the distinct use of the word "marriage", our relationship would be utterly unsustainable in the United States, thanks to what remains of the Defense of Marriage Act.  And even if ALL of DOMA were to be repealed in the future, there is still no specific law that respects on a Federal level anything other than actual marriage.   
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 23, 2019, 06:46:19 PM
3.  Same sex couples did try the "other name" thing at one point.
I believe he meant marriage itself should be officially dismantled worldwide and renamed into something else that will carry its benefits in a respective country or state.

Interesting info, I see that marriage in USA isn't unlike medical insurance. In that case it makes a lot of sense indeed. Living in the country without both is such a mixed blessing, we already have the most of the these so-called benefits (or, rather, the lack of handicaps for unmarried). Cheers from Ukraine.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 23, 2019, 07:36:55 PM
3.  Same sex couples did try the "other name" thing at one point.
I believe he meant marriage itself should be officially dismantled worldwide and renamed into something else that will carry its benefits in a respective country or state.

Interesting info, I see that marriage in USA isn't unlike medical insurance. In that case it makes a lot of sense indeed. Living in the country without both is such a mixed blessing, we already have the most of the these so-called benefits (or, rather, the lack of handicaps for unmarried). Cheers from Ukraine.

Thanks.  :)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 24, 2019, 07:54:16 AM
You won't believe, at one point I considered emigration to USA as the one of options, but quickly scrapped the idea once learnt of taxes that impossible to avoid, mortgages, medical insurance, 10000x inflated prices on pharms and so on... In USSR, those who don't work, don't eat (c), an infamous anti-parasite law, in USA don't receive medical aid, apparently. Was more than surprised that an average American had less actual money on hands than me back then, in relatively merry 2000's. Even now I could've used the surrounding chaos to my benefits if managed to sort my health problems (ironically enough, not drug-related) out.

Dismantlement would solve the problem with "traditional values" crowd as well, because marriage that bears quite a some cultural baggage would become a purely informal institution distanced from official partnership/union/etc, so no one would be stepping on each other's toes.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 24, 2019, 02:49:56 PM
You won't believe, at one point I considered emigration to USA as the one of options, but quickly scrapped the idea once learnt of taxes that impossible to avoid, mortgages, medical insurance, 10000x inflated prices on pharms and so on... In USSR, those who don't work, don't eat (c), an infamous anti-parasite law, in USA don't receive medical aid, apparently. Was more than surprised that an average American had less actual money on hands than me back then, in relatively merry 2000's. Even now I could've used the surrounding chaos to my benefits if managed to sort my health problems (ironically enough, not drug-related) out.

Dismantlement would solve the problem with "traditional values" crowd as well, because marriage that bears quite a some cultural baggage would become a purely informal institution distanced from official partnership/union/etc, so no one would be stepping on each other's toes.

I once knew (online) a hot gay guy from the Ukraine that I would Skype with, though he pretended to everyone who knew him in person that he was straight.  He had a son with his ex wife.  My great grandfather immigrated from the Ukraine, so some of my ancestry is from there as well.  He managed to stow away on a boat, though I don't fully know the story behind it.  I know that when he got here his birth name was "Ivan" but upon entry to the USA they put his name down as "John" and it legally stuck with him the rest of his life.

Marriage definitely has deep cultural roots in the USA.  Its unlikely that the whole country will welcome dismantling, though some southern states would, as some are trying to implement that now, rather than giving marriage licenses to same sex couples.  The problem with it though is that they ultimately deny Federal benefits to themselves too.  And its not the people voting to do that, its the politicians making the decision for the people, which I think will upset a lot of them in the long run. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on April 24, 2019, 09:11:16 PM
Marriage can be a great thing, and can help keep family structures in place. However, I think it's a little too easy to divorce, or break the commitment of "till death do we part", so it has become rather meaningless. I think anyone should be able to marry anyone else as long as they aren't directly related or under age. Coming from a broken home life growing up like many of us, I'd say a loving gay couple is far better than a group home or worse places I experienced. It's hard enough to be a single parent, adding prejudice against their sexual preference can also cause unnecessary cultural isolation that leads to a bad home life. I can respect people having a religious view that marriage should be only between a man or a woman, but I think most hide behind their bible to justify their prejudices. If they don't understand something, it's blasphemous, and they have some bible passage that supposedly back up their claim. Many people here probably have people like this in their family.

"Ezekiel 23:20 "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." The bible can be interpreted in many ways, even an erotic novel. If someone simply tells me some Westboro Baptist Church talking points, I can't take it seriously. If someone isn't harming anyone else in a provable way, they should be treated equally. Even if they see people who are homosexual as being flawed in some way, I don't agree with it, but they shouldn't act like they're perfect either. as I'm typing this, I'm thinking of one of my cousins who is very biblical when it comes to anything she morally disagrees with. Then she wonders why her gay or bi daughter has run away several times, and why her family life is so screwed up.

I'm dead tired from work, I hope this is somewhat intelligible. Sorry for the rant, but I felt provoked by the subject for whatever reason. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 24, 2019, 10:37:25 PM
Marriage can be a great thing, and can help keep family structures in place. However, I think it's a little too easy to divorce, or break the commitment of "till death do we part", so it has become rather meaningless. I think anyone should be able to marry anyone else as long as they aren't directly related or under age. Coming from a broken home life growing up like many of us, I'd say a loving gay couple is far better than a group home or worse places I experienced. It's hard enough to be a single parent, adding prejudice against their sexual preference can also cause unnecessary cultural isolation that leads to a bad home life. I can respect people having a religious view that marriage should be only between a man or a woman, but I think most hide behind their bible to justify their prejudices. If they don't understand something, it's blasphemous, and they have some bible passage that supposedly back up their claim. Many people here probably have people like this in their family.

"Ezekiel 23:20 "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." The bible can be interpreted in many ways, even an erotic novel. If someone simply tells me some Westboro Baptist Church talking points, I can't take it seriously. If someone isn't harming anyone else in a provable way, they should be treated equally. Even if they see people who are homosexual as being flawed in some way, I don't agree with it, but they shouldn't act like they're perfect either. as I'm typing this, I'm thinking of one of my cousins who is very biblical when it comes to anything she morally disagrees with. Then she wonders why her gay or bi daughter has run away several times, and why her family life is so screwed up.

I'm dead tired from work, I hope this is somewhat intelligible. Sorry for the rant, but I felt provoked by the subject for whatever reason.

No need to apologize.  Personally, I enjoy your contributions to this discussion.  I appreciate your affirming comments about same sex relationships, parenting and marriage rights. 

I agree that marriage these days seems to be seen as "disposable".  This is a sad thing.  Its something that I personally hold to be very sacred.  I intend to ONLY do it once.  If my husband eventually divorces me, its unlikely that I will try to find a new relationship elsewhere.  I am done with that game, that's for sure. 

I wish I could say that all same sex couples take marriage more seriously than the average person these days, but that is simply not always true, unfortunately.  LGBT people as well as straight cis people need to start taking marriage more seriously, in my opinion. 

I will say however that there ARE those same sex couples who do take it VERY seriously.  They fought long and hard for the right to get married and that LONG and often painful journey and battle is not lost on them.  My boyfriend and I are among those types.  During the course of the battle for marriage equality I lost my first love because of it.  Its something that haunts me to this day. I feel fortunate that I was able to find such a powerful love again.   
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 26, 2019, 07:18:28 AM
I think anyone should be able to marry anyone else as long as they aren't directly related...

Even this requirement is mostly outdated since a chance of genetic disorders that does not result in a stillbirth has turned to be greatly overestimated, so unless someone's up to build a whole inbred dynasty... Not to say, even random people could be related closely than initially appears, and no one is safe from bumping into an unknown half-sibling or two.
To add insult to injury, by the virtue of today ecology, a chance of an average person to win in this genetic disorder lottery almost matches that of a sisterfvcker.
More so, the most of these dreaded aristocratic quirks aren't only perfectly manageable with today medicine, but does not decrease the quality of life, again, if we aren't talking dynasties.
Though my family is anything but inbred from both, Russian and Ukrainian, sides, and anything but aristocratic, myself have a share of them. I remember the doctor was kidding that I should reclaim my expropriated mansion or demand a compensation, following that recent trend.

The perfect example of a taboo that lost its meaning. Probably, no other worldwide common one comes close to its strictness/meaningfulness ratio.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 26, 2019, 03:06:17 PM
even random people could be related closely than initially appears, and no one is safe from bumping into an unknown half-sibling or two.

True, and this has happened, thanks in part to over use of the same donor for multiple artificial inseminations by certain shady fertility clinics. 

Its also happened because of tight lipped parents.  I was watching a clip of a British talk show recently on youtube where these two gay guys fell in love and became a couple and then one day boyfriend A was at boyfriend B's house and he noticed an older picture of his own mother in the home.  When boyfriend A asked why boyfriend B had a picture of HIS mother, boyfriend B informed him that it was HIS mother.  One of the boys had a picture of her from the past but didn't have a current relationship with her while the other boy did have a current relationship with her.  They were half brothers.  One raised by the mother and one raised by one of the fathers. Nobody told them they had a brother as they were growing up.  Initially they were sorrowful that they had to end their romantic relationship (as neither was keen on being involved in an incestuous relationship) but over time they grew happy to replace that with a brotherly relationship.  Some people in similar situations have decided to just stay together and say "to hell with it". 

Those "to hell with it" types often run into trouble with the law, of course as in many countries incest of that degree is very illegal, although some countries are so heteronormative that it hasn't occurred to them to write the laws in such a way as to even cover same sex relationships.  In Hong Kong for instance, there is no prohibition against same sex incest of any stripe between consenting adults.  Then again other countries are so homophobic that same sex relationships are prohibited regardless.  Often punishable by death. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 26, 2019, 07:52:17 PM
Coming from the third world country where incest is legal, I mean, everything besides a marriage between half-siblings and closer, I was more than surprised than it's possible (in theory, at least) to get 10 years and more for a mere laying with a sister in some first world countries, USA included, should someone rat this out. That's a definition of barbaric, if Soviet goverment did something right, they restarted the legistative system from zero, as a result medieval remnants ended up where they were supposed to be. USSR law itself is an order of magnitude more robust and concise than, say, British, we don't even have such a weird shit as concepts of a precedent and trespassing. Yeah, the translator had quite a trouble with the famous "TRESPASSERS W" plate. How good actual laws are and how well they're being followed... that's a whole another question. For example, USSR self-defence laws were overly strict, but manageable, by Ukrainian laws you cannot defend yourself before getting killed or maimed.

If I'm correct, Napoleon did the similar thing with French law.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Azrael on April 26, 2019, 09:48:56 PM
Found the guy all the incest links on pornhub are for.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 27, 2019, 01:15:25 PM
Is the "Law" a dump stat for Torries so they think that "Criminal Code" is a porn movie title?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Azrael on April 27, 2019, 09:35:44 PM
Is the "Law" a dump stat for Torries so they think that "Criminal Code" is a porn movie title?

I *love* it when they try to give pornos a story!
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 28, 2019, 09:02:58 AM
My guess if such a movie exists indeed it's a gay/BDSM porn.
We were talking real world taboos codified as laws, and implications of breaking them that also quite real, here. For hikki incest fantasies, there is my "Anime Sucks" thread.

Back on rails, there's another reason that such a characters in videogames requre extra care from devs today: an ill-written non-straight character could be perceived as a political propaganda, while an ill-written hetero one not (at least, less likely). The same is true not only for LGBT, but for any character that might have any political connotations or connections to recent real world events and trends, especially controversional ones.
As an illustration, if LGBT movement was long dissolved due to the achieved goals and lack of any further need, this would be different.

Mizhena from an infamous Siege of Dragonspear expansion is a glaring example of both bad writing and sloppily done transgender fanservice. If gender change is so common a practice in Forgotten Realms (do you remember that girdle, one of favourite old-school DM jokes from the start of original Baldur's Gate 1?), why would she even mention it? If not, why a PC cannot even joke about this, not to say ridicule her or be mean? And if so, why she would throw that in a stranger's face right after "Hello"?
It would look another way around and make much more sense should she share her story after a PC won her disposition, I bet no one would object but trolls.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 28, 2019, 11:59:02 AM
(Dropping in the argument after leaving for a while and hoping to not write about stuff already discussed....)

One thing I hate is when big entertainment corps create and (heavily) advertise a LGBT character which his/her sexual orientation aren't relevant or necessary to the plot. I hate it for some reasons:
- it's an exploitation of the emancipation of the LGBT community
- puts limits to the plot before the necessity of knowing how to develop the character comes
- the pointlessness of specifing things and putting borders to the process of knowing the character
- the actual fact of point out a P.C. aspect out of the blue which only can give reasons to gamegaters/anti-LGBT/assorted bigots to whine about the myth of the homosexual agenda and raise recognition. While it could have been avoided (other than help the LGBT people recognition) to leave these aspect not defined, express them when the right moment comes, after the character is more known and familiarized, and not making big announcements. To make it feel as a natural thing as it should be. Then only the more extremist haters will hate them while more people received better there characters and avoid these morons.
Also true (but only for the advertisement aspects) on non white male characters
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 28, 2019, 02:28:14 PM
Sure, it may seem like that at first, but I've overlooked the political factor back then because overestimated the social. Although, I'm more concerned by actual gamers than lynch mob that will always find a reason to complain. To create a valid one is to give away a weapon, not to say people who would otherwise support an author would stay away from a lynch procession or even join it.

Speaking of Baldur's Gate, by the twist of fate or chance, one of the best fanmade companion mods is an incest one, Imoen Romance (for Baldur's Gate 2). It includes so much of a non-romantic content it should've been named "Imoen Expansion" or something similar. The writing quality, unlike Dragonspear, is high, and, among everything else, it fills a major gap in her dialogue that left unfinished because initially she was supposed to be killed off, so it has a value even for players that aren't into incest at all.
While adoptive siblings formally, as it turns out, they're actually share a father, Bhaal, the Lord of Murder, so it's an incest indeed.
If you wanna get a good laugh, I strongly recommend this post.
http://www.shsforums.net/topic/54515-why-nobody-should-get-imoen-romance/
Yeah girl, but I still didn't get why I should avoid a stellar mod because it (understandably) has some creepy audience and especially what your painkiller (ab)use has to do with your ill decisions, they aren't known to impair mental abilities (painkillers/opioids/opiates were the doping of choice for intellectual labor people, including many famous ones, in early 20th century and all way back).
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 28, 2019, 06:01:53 PM
My guess if such a movie exists indeed it's a gay/BDSM porn.

Now now, I *do not* watch straight porn and even I know one of the most popular STRAIGHT porn series franchises of all time is "Taboo", a series of films about incest between mothers and sons, fathers and daughters, brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, etc.   There is NO long running movie series like that in gay porn.  Sure, every now and again a movie might feature that type of storyline but you can find that in all porn orientation genres to some degree, really.  But we gays do NOT have a wildly popular dedicated series like that that spans 23 films and 3 decades.  JUST for the record. lol


(Dropping in the argument after leaving for a while and hoping to not write about stuff already discussed....)

One thing I hate is when big entertainment corps create and (heavily) advertise a LGBT character which his/her sexual orientation aren't relevant or necessary to the plot. I hate it for some reasons:
- it's an exploitation of the emancipation of the LGBT community
- puts limits to the plot before the necessity of knowing how to develop the character comes
- the pointlessness of specifing things and putting borders to the process of knowing the character
- the actual fact of point out a P.C. aspect out of the blue which only can give reasons to gamegaters/anti-LGBT/assorted bigots to whine about the myth of the homosexual agenda and raise recognition. While it could have been avoided (other than help the LGBT people recognition) to leave these aspect not defined, express them when the right moment comes, after the character is more known and familiarized, and not making big announcements. To make it feel as a natural thing as it should be. Then only the more extremist haters will hate them while more people received better there characters and avoid these morons.
Also true (but only for the advertisement aspects) on non white male characters

I kind of agree for the most part, but I also like being aware of what films and video games feature LGBT characters as well.  And I think its good for games with romances to advertise the LGBT characters since romance is most certainly a place where their sexual orientation is relevant to the plot.  Its one of the first things I try to find out about when I learn that a video game will feature romanceable characters. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 28, 2019, 08:38:44 PM
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda. But it's clear that there were no agendas save her trying to sell her stuff and failing miserably in doing so. Even myself, as underinformed as I was, would have done a better job. That raises a question, why she (and not me, for example) wears a professional writer's mantle and gets paid in the first place. Won't raise a finger for such a person, no matter the actual reasons of attackers, like "to hell with that, you're on your own, this is survival of the fittest".
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 28, 2019, 08:40:08 PM
My guess if such a movie exists indeed it's a gay/BDSM porn.

Now now, I *do not* watch straight porn and even I know one of the most popular STRAIGHT porn series franchises of all time is "Taboo", a series of films about incest between mothers and sons, fathers and daughters, brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, etc.   There is NO long running movie series like that in gay porn.  Sure, every now and again a movie might feature that type of storyline but you can find that in all porn orientation genres to some degree, really.  But we gays do NOT have a wildly popular dedicated series like that that spans 23 films and 3 decades.  JUST for the record. lol

For the joy of bible belt rednecks I suppose
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 28, 2019, 08:42:44 PM
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.

Tecnically exists a gay agenda. Is called 14th emendament. (cit.)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 28, 2019, 09:24:22 PM
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda. But it's clear that there were no agendas save her trying to sell her stuff and failing miserably in doing so. Even myself, as underinformed as I was, would have done a better job. That raises a question, why she (and not me, for example) wears a professional writer's mantle and gets paid in the first place. Won't raise a finger for such a person, no matter the actual reasons of attackers, like "to hell with that, you're on your own, this is survival of the fittest".

I don't think I have ever heard of Amber Scott, what does she write and talk about regarding LGBT themes?


For the joy of bible belt rednecks I suppose

That would make sense lol


I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.

Tecnically exists a gay agenda. Is called 14th emendament. (cit.)

There's also this!!!  Aaaargh!!!!

(https://pics.me.me/coming-soon-the-gay-agenda-they-worked-at-their-jobs-5044849.png)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 29, 2019, 06:09:42 AM
For the joy of bible belt rednecks I suppose

That would make sense lol

Or also supporters of trump, a supporter, among other things, of incest (even if in a foreseeable rapish enactment)

I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.

Tecnically exists a gay agenda. Is called 14th emendament. (cit.)

There's also this!!!  Aaaargh!!!!

(https://pics.me.me/coming-soon-the-gay-agenda-they-worked-at-their-jobs-5044849.png)

Normal people. Chilling.
"We wanted to safe humanity, we tried it all to warn the world on the menace of gays: perverts, pedophiles, freaks. But, despite our efforts, they managed to show the world how they are absolutely not like us."
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 29, 2019, 06:53:16 AM
"We wanted to safe humanity, we tried it all to warn the world on the menace of gays: perverts, pedophiles, freaks. But, despite our efforts, they managed to show the world how they are absolutely not like us."

That quote makes me think of this one: 

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/87/81/59/878159f435e79ebe2778d71bd7e11e66.jpg)
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 29, 2019, 07:06:35 AM
And me of that film:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_cde265cabe.jpg) (https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_8175162c3b_o.jpg)

Quote from: Eros
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of our planet!

Or also supporters of Trump, a supporter, among other things, of incest (even if in a foreseeable rapish enactment)
Ha, wasn't aware of this, so it seems that one topic on which we aren't disagree upon has been finally unearthed. Apparently, the only other is hormonal treatment for scalp hair loss. Such an irony, Finasteride, a testosterone antagonist he was using, is an old-school pharm, effective, has minimal side effects (save libido loss) and dirt cheap... Everywhere but in USA.

I don't think I have ever heard of Amber Scott, what does she write and talk about regarding LGBT themes?
Did a horrible attempt in transgender fan (dis)service aka Mizhena that I've mentioned earlier, which, in conjunction with her threats to bring "diversity" into character writing, set off not only gamegaters and such, but the supossed target audience that wasn't amused either.

Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.

UPD: to clear it up, it's not a visual novel / date sim, but a puzzle game (as hardcore as nails mixed with broken glass) that includes romance content. And it isn't erotic either, despite the deliberately misleading cover art, unless you count the stuff like a pregnancy scam as such.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 29, 2019, 07:19:00 PM
And me of that film:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_cde265cabe.jpg) (https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_8175162c3b_o.jpg)

Quote from: Eros
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of our planet!

Or also supporters of Trump, a supporter, among other things, of incest (even if in a foreseeable rapish enactment)
Ha, wasn't aware of this, so it seems that one topic on which we aren't disagree upon has been finally unearthed. Apparently, the only other is hormonal treatment for scalp hair loss. Such an irony, Finasteride, a testosterone antagonist he was using, is an old-school pharm, effective, has minimal side effects (save libido loss) and dirt cheap... Everywhere but in USA.

I don't think I have ever heard of Amber Scott, what does she write and talk about regarding LGBT themes?
Did a horrible attempt in transgender fan (dis)service aka Mizhena that I've mentioned earlier, which, in conjunction with her threats to bring "diversity" into character writing, set off not only gamegaters and such, but the supossed target audience that wasn't amused either.

Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.

Very interesting, thanks for the info! 

As an aside that is interesting to me and one recently learned, it seems that the Clan Tremere founder Tremere, a male, was gay or bi and at one point was lovers with the male vampire Goratrix, who was bi.  Definitive proof that LGBT characters can be and ARE canonically included in WoD/VtM lore.  I was excited to discover this. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Barabbah on April 29, 2019, 08:01:31 PM
I bet those mages, having such a huge knowledge and intelligence, would't even know concepts of bi, gay, etero and whatever else :P
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on April 30, 2019, 02:55:49 AM
I bet those mages, having such a huge knowledge and intelligence, would't even know concepts of bi, gay, etero and whatever else :P

Well the terms are modern but the concepts and realities they convey have always existed.  Like when I tell people that I knew I was gay as far back as 4 years of age, I don't mean I sat there thinking "Gee I am gay" with that word in my head.  But I knew I like boys.  My first crush at 4 years of age was Christopher Atkins after watching an old 80s flick called "The Pirate Movie".  lol 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on April 30, 2019, 05:13:29 AM
That quote above is one of my favorites because in Russian it also has a second meaning:
Quote
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of my [own] planet!
Which is an epitome of Tzimisce.

As for Tremere and Goratrix, sure, this counts as an ok fanservice unlike fan disservice such as Sasha Vykos or Zachary Sikorsky. What's the most funny, the latter could pass should he been picked up by a regular Sabbat pack for his skills (not by LGBT pack for being LGBT), which would imply that the Sabbat don't care about this sort of thing.
Speaking of long-living mages, nearly every sorcerer and sorceress from Witcher universe that able to recall what "sex" stands for (the most of them are, enter Sapkowski), has long forgotten what "orientation" is.

Should add that Catherine game pissed off not only LGBT activists, but feminists as well, they also conviniently overlooked the fact that the men are more than are match to these women, and on top of that, gods are complete jackasses. If anything, it's misanthropic, not misogynistic.
This highlights the problem I've mentioned: those activists who only out for some money or want to justify their own existence by witch-hunting homophobia, or just overly sensitive, are making a bad name for LGBT. Due to this kind of people I considered the movement more corrupt that it is (less than modern feminism though). Not to say, political correctness, that has nothing to do with actual politeness, is a bane of game development and human existence, it does not serve anything useful but an excuse to cavil at something. And the worst of it all, everyone's being dragged into this language game, because of "political correctness" people started to see offences that aren't there.

Sadly, this kind of sensitivity isn't limited to supposed activists, many people over internet who are openly LGBT tend to act like this, for example, I got blocked from someone's profile on DeviantArt for a comment about Cyndi Lauper's gay flag dress being inappropriate for upcoming Alice: Asylum, for the reason that videogame, similar to the singer's lycics, is about people whose inner worlds aren't fit society's standards, not LGBT exclusive. Should they want to reference Cyndi Lauper, she used far more interesting and distinctive outfits; this particular one is one of the worst, it's trite.
It's quite symbolic that her most widely known hit, "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun" isn't a pro-LGBT (despite her being a well-known supporter), but "don't tell us how to live" song.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 02, 2019, 08:17:21 PM
That quote above is one of my favorites because in Russian it also has a second meaning:
Quote
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of my [own] planet!
Which is an epitome of Tzimisce.

As for Tremere and Goratrix, sure, this counts as an ok fanservice unlike fan disservice such as Sasha Vykos or Zachary Sikorsky. What's the most funny, the latter could pass should he been picked up by a regular Sabbat pack for his skills (not by LGBT pack for being LGBT), which would imply that the Sabbat don't care about this sort of thing.

Its my hope none of the factions care about this sort of thing.  LGBT people want to be picked for their skills and intelligence and not because they're LGBT.  I look forward to a day when the fact that I am LGBT is totally incidental.

I love Girls just Want to Have Fun! 

You know she DID release an LGBT specific version of that song.  The "Hey Now (Girls Just Want to Have Fun)" version.

 

She has been an LGBT ally for a LONG time.  LOOOONG before it was a cool thing to be.  I have a lot of love and gratitude for Cyndi Lauper. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 03, 2019, 07:34:24 AM
Apparently by this she wanted to illustrate that lyrics are deliberately designed swappable, so everyone can do their own cover version. And there are covers from pretty much every possible point of view indeed. The album title also emphasises that the idea is broader than just LGBT. She also performed in eccentric outfits long before Madonna, and please note I said "eccentric", not "obscene".
What I've found appealing about her, unlike the latter, she wasn't involved in sex/LGBT/feminism exploitation. She held just the right balance between LGBT and broader issue, and her stuff is about everyone. It's a shame she's enjoys less popularity among the general public.

80's were interesting times, the only era in music industry when deviations from mainstream weren't only tolerated, but actively encouraged by bigwigs in the financial sense. Incidentally, the only era when gay jokes in lyrics were actually funny and not gay at all.

Like this, by a kvlt progressive power metal band: Scanner - 1989 - Terminal Earth - L.A.D.Y. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbIAY3Gc-Y8)
Went to a gay-club
Sent by a friend of mine
He knew a little lady
Waitin' for me inside

I said, "Man, don't be kiddin'!"
I don't want to change my style
Could not believe my eyes when
I saw who I have found

Lady, tell me what to do
What can I do
Lady, I need a doctor
To help me to cure
My longin' for you

See you later
That's what she said to me
I could not believe that she gave me her key
See you later
The only fact I know
I can't let her go
See you later

Like a cat in a lonesome alley
Like a wolf in a midnight town
I've been struck down by confusion
Straight here in my heart
Looks like the most of people aren't into 80's or have no sense of humor, music critics included, never seen a person who got this
is actually a self-irony on their 80's outfits. He had mistaken a girly girl for a crossdresser, likewise she fell into the same trap. Power metal musicians look so effeminate that even lesbians fall for them.
So, this is NOT what you think it is.

On the DeviantArt incident, memory failed me so I initially understated it, the gay dress girl did not only blocked me, but also flagged my post as spam, in another words, were trying to get me permanently banned. It certainly wasn't a harmless attempt since DeviantArt staff is known to ban people without any investigation, actually I once was banned (but managed to make a successful appeal) for allegged spam over a disagreement with someone (not LGBT-related). But this time I avoided it by making a counter-report for spam report function abuse.

To continue on LGBT trends that could contribute to a negative impression, I would also name historical figures / famous people exploitation, the practice into fitting corpses into respective stereotypes, while they did not share the same moral or ethical values, (mis)attributed to them, with members. The most glaring examples is protrayal of Oscar Wilde neraly as a modern LGBT activist, while actually he was his own type of weird, one of the kind, or fresh Antisex movement that recently claimed H. P. Lovecraft into its ranks...
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 03, 2019, 02:00:19 PM
To continue on LGBT trends that could contribute to a negative impression, I would also name historical figures / famous people exploitation, the practice into fitting corpses into respective stereotypes, while they did not share the same moral or ethical values, (mis)attributed to them, with members. The most glaring examples is protrayal of Oscar Wilde neraly as a modern LGBT activist, while actually he was his own type of weird, one of the kind, or fresh Antisex movement that recently claimed H. P. Lovecraft into its ranks...

People spend too much time judging entire groups of people on the actions or opinions of some.  I don't care about Oscar Wilde one way or another.  I like that they adapted his character "Dorian Gray" for "The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina" and that's about it.  lol

But back to the 80s, one of my favorite videos that HAD to be totally gay was the Dead or Alive video "I'll Save You All My Kisses" The ironic thing here is that back then, he (Pete Burns) actually only dated women.  He wouldn't start dating a guy for like 20 years or so.  But this video gets HOT in my opinion.  lol  (I actually like sexy stuff myself)



Then we have "Relax" by Frankie Goes to Hollywood.  Now HE was gay and lived his life that way back then, but MTV wouldn't play this video so he had to do a more "appropriate" version. 



Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 04, 2019, 01:59:33 AM
Unfortunately, this happens without any intent to judge if you don't already have a strong opinion on the topic, on subconscious level if you like. In the same way these witch hunters subtly skew LGBT people opinion. If you did not play Catherine yourself, or watch lets plays, or read wiki, an encounter with such an info will undoubtely skew your impression of it. Complainers voices are always the loudest, those who are vocal about it eiter bashed it or found it problematic (a dog whistle word as Americans say). I'm sure there are much more LGBT people who did not see any problem with it, but this requires some effort to imagine, since they've remained silent.
As critical to this sort of thing as I am, I did not entirely avoid this pitfall as well, even if made the right conclusions at large.

People also spend so much time calling names and attaching labels that no time is left to check if they actually fit. I was being called child-free, asexual, antisex, and recently learnt of a new stuff, anti-natalism, guess how... Even if I share an idea or two with these, only somewhat and only on the surface.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 05, 2019, 12:51:57 AM
Unfortunately, this happens without any intent to judge if you don't already have a strong opinion on the topic, on subconscious level if you like. In the same way these witch hunters subtly skew LGBT people opinion. If you did not play Catherine yourself, or watch lets plays, or read wiki, an encounter with such an info will undoubtely skew your impression of it. Complainers voices are always the loudest, those who are vocal about it eiter bashed it or found it problematic (a dog whistle word as Americans say). I'm sure there are much more LGBT people who did not see any problem with it, but this requires some effort to imagine, since they've remained silent.
As critical to this sort of thing as I am, I did not entirely avoid this pitfall as well, even if made the right conclusions at large.

People also spend so much time calling names and attaching labels that no time is left to check if they actually fit. I was being called child-free, asexual, antisex, and recently learnt of a new stuff, anti-natalism, guess how... Even if I share an idea or two with these, only somewhat and only on the surface.

I have never heard of this "Catherine" game, what kind of game is it and what problems did they have with it?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 05, 2019, 05:21:54 AM
Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.

UPD: to clear it up, it's not a visual novel / date sim, but a puzzle game (as hardcore as nails mixed with broken glass) that includes romance content. And it isn't erotic either, despite the deliberately misleading cover art, unless you count the stuff like a pregnancy scam as such.
Should add that Catherine game pissed off not only LGBT activists, but feminists as well, they also conviniently overlooked the fact that the men are more than are match to these women, and on top of that, gods are complete jackasses. If anything, it's misanthropic, not misogynistic.
To sum it up, LGBT witch hunters did not like that Erika held off that fact about herself from a guy, feminist witch hunters that women here are MEAN, both took this out of context. The game became scandalous because of that.
I think that "political correctness" trend is the main culprit here, it sets people apart by making them see offences that arent here.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 06, 2019, 05:03:17 PM
Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.

UPD: to clear it up, it's not a visual novel / date sim, but a puzzle game (as hardcore as nails mixed with broken glass) that includes romance content. And it isn't erotic either, despite the deliberately misleading cover art, unless you count the stuff like a pregnancy scam as such.
Should add that Catherine game pissed off not only LGBT activists, but feminists as well, they also conviniently overlooked the fact that the men are more than are match to these women, and on top of that, gods are complete jackasses. If anything, it's misanthropic, not misogynistic.
To sum it up, LGBT witch hunters did not like that Erika held off that fact about herself from a guy, feminist witch hunters that women here are MEAN, both took this out of context. The game became scandalous because of that.
I think that "political correctness" trend is the main culprit here, it sets people apart by making them see offences that arent here.

Well, people get worked up these days in this age of what I like to call "Twitter Rage".  If the game doesn't include actually blowing LGBT people away merely for being LGBT then if they don't like it, they don't have to play it. 

I can totally understand LGBT activists (and Jews) getting worked up about games like this though: 

(Its called "Angry Goy II" and you go after LGBT people and Jews and pretty much just blow them away, cut them up or kill them in any brutal fashion you can.)
(https://sdgln.com/sites/default/files/styles/story_large/public/articles/images/main/VIDEO_0.jpg?itok=lNCYNLS3&timestamp=1542123559)


Then there's this game where you play as either Jesus, Hitler, Putin, Mussolini or Trump lookalikes and you go after gay men, trans women and other types they deem terrible and its called "Jesus Strikes Back: Judgement Day": 

(Hitler lookalike aka "Dolph" shooting a gay man)
(https://www.gaystarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Hitler_Shot.jpg)

(Trump-like and Putin-like figures getting ready to dispatch a trans woman)
(https://www.gaystarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Trump_Putin_Roof.jpg)

(Jesus getting ready to execute a gay man)
(https://www.gaystarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Jesus_Murders_Gay.jpg)


I went to their awful website just once and I will never repeat that mistake again.  Blech.  But it appeared to me that there was even a point in the game where you can re-enact the Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub Massacre of 2016.  So yeah, I totally understand people getting worked up about THOSE games. 

But anger over games like the one you described, they need to let it go. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 06, 2019, 07:56:01 PM
I think no need to get excited over these either. Seems to be a stealth parody, the one of "insert your hate object" games that hail their origins from 8-bit NES hacks by pirates who swapped character sprites with every kind of absurd stuff imaginable, being successfully sold to neo-Nazi wannabes... Which is extra hilarious because actual neo-Nazi with realistic goals arent concerned with sexual minorities simply because they're minority that aren't pack enough power nor has any intention to actually rock the boat. Immigrants, especially from certain countries, on the other hand...

But I understand why someone could get offended, not everyone shares my rather twisted sense of humor.

On actual neo-Nazi humor, cannot but recall one of my friends from Russia, who happens to be a member of such a group. They once executed an "anti-gay" action against a gay parade during 00's. The column of girls sporting "Feminism Sucks" black t-shirts (some of them also dyed hair in a certain color) marched towards the parade leaders and willed to join. They declared that their demonstration is for the "rights of women who aren't feminists". After some deliberation, it was allowed. The message was: not being a feminist today is gay.
This was inspired by of-the-wall performances by some Russian art-groups, like an orgy at zoological museum in the "support" of Medvedev. By the way, that was me who sent him the link.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 06, 2019, 11:02:55 PM
Which is extra hilarious because actual neo-Nazi with realistic goals arent concerned with sexual minorities simply because they're minority that aren't pack enough power nor has any intention to actually rock the boat. Immigrants, especially from certain countries, on the other hand...

I think it might be different in other countries.  The first game, the Angry Goy game was created by a fairly well known actual White Supremacist American named Christopher Cantwell.  He's famous for organizing the infamous Neo Nazi march on Charlottesville Virginia rally that resulted in the death of one woman and the injuring of 35 others as one of the Neo Nazis plowed his car through a crowd of protesters. Christopher has become known as the "Crying Nazi" because of his sobbing rage over the conviction of Heather Heyer's murderer, his compatriot who drove his car through the people injuring 35 and killing 1 and the fact that the cops were looking for him for his role in the deadly event.


The fatal car attack:
(https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/twip-04-charlottesville-protest-car-crash-blur-ap-jt-170817_hpMain_5_12x5_992.jpg) 


Victim, Heather Heyer
(https://media.graytvinc.com/images/690*388/HEATHER+HEYER.png)

At any rate, "Angry Goy II" at least is created by a genuine Neo Nazi.  The Jesus game may be created by trolls, I don't know, but the people who love it are not faking their bigotry and hatred of those different from themselves.   They make that so clear in the game's forums. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 07, 2019, 07:37:29 AM
If so, it's a different matter. It speaks something about this person intellect if the genuine game is indistinguishable from a troll one.
As for the second one, Hitler vs LGBT is pretty much the pot calling the kettle black, or more like bees vs honey. The pervert against gays, the meth freak against druggies... the definition of compulsive hypocrite, which is, sadly, what he degenerated into after such an impressive upstart.

Sure, very different. Every major Russian city like Moscow, St. Petersburg, even Novosibirsk to some extent, as well as some smaller ones, has a Caucassian problem, which is more than real. If you have something like this on hand, you won't be objecting over imaginary threats very much. It's disheartening that there's so much anti-gay / traditional values / etc freaks, and so little people who would actually do something useful. As far as I know, no gay parade in Moscow ever succeded, they either were banned by the major at time, Luzhkov, or disrupted in some other way, and the very same Luzhkov would do nothing about these unsolicited guests that aren't only disrespectful, but numerous enough to disrupt the local economy.
There are more actual neo-Nazi than usually assumed, but wannabees or groups like you've mentioned are far more vocal and well-known to the wide public.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Highwayman667 on May 09, 2019, 11:53:05 PM
I went to their awful website just once and I will never repeat that mistake again.  Blech.  But it appeared to me that there was even a point in the game where you can re-enact the Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub Massacre of 2016.  So yeah, I totally understand people getting worked up about THOSE games. 

But anger over games like the one you described, they need to let it go.

I don't know about wether we should "let go" of some of these things. I'm neither gay nor jewish but I honestly cannot stand for trash like this having the title of videogame, it dishonors the genre and hurts people in more ways than one.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Signothorn on May 10, 2019, 12:16:46 AM
What about a game like Postal 2? Could or should it be made today? I don't take it seriously and find it hilarious to piss on people to blow off stress. I also like pissing on Gary Coleman and Osama Bin Laden types in the game. Using a cat as a shotgun silencer is also pure genius imho. Where exactly is the line between dark humor that not everyone gets and something that is too insensitive? Dark humor isn't for everyone, but does it need to be?
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Highwayman667 on May 10, 2019, 01:32:31 AM
What about a game like Postal 2? Could or should it be made today? I don't take it seriously and find it hilarious to piss on people to blow off stress. I also like pissing on Gary Coleman and Osama Bin Laden types in the game. Using a cat as a shotgun silencer is also pure genius imho. Where exactly is the line between dark humor that not everyone gets and something that is too insensitive? Dark humor isn't for everyone, but does it need to be?

I think those are perfectly valid questions. I myself have never played the Postal games but I hear they are completely hilarious.

At the same time however, there's nothing wrong with listening to people who find similar content to be hurtful in some way.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: DarkZephyr on May 10, 2019, 01:59:10 AM
I went to their awful website just once and I will never repeat that mistake again.  Blech.  But it appeared to me that there was even a point in the game where you can re-enact the Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub Massacre of 2016.  So yeah, I totally understand people getting worked up about THOSE games. 

But anger over games like the one you described, they need to let it go.

I don't know about wether we should "let go" of some of these things. I'm neither gay nor jewish but I honestly cannot stand for trash like this having the title of videogame, it dishonors the genre and hurts people in more ways than one.

No I agree when it comes to the examples I gave.  Those "games" are dreadful.  To me they aren't really games or "dark humor" but rather spank banks for homicidal bigots.

What about a game like Postal 2? Could or should it be made today? I don't take it seriously and find it hilarious to piss on people to blow off stress. I also like pissing on Gary Coleman and Osama Bin Laden types in the game. Using a cat as a shotgun silencer is also pure genius imho. Where exactly is the line between dark humor that not everyone gets and something that is too insensitive? Dark humor isn't for everyone, but does it need to be?

I don't think the games I brought up can be compared to the Postal games, nor do I think its really a matter of "insensitivity" or "dark humor" regarding those specific games.  *Truly* celebrating genocide Vs taking out (possibly a**holish, possibly not) frustrations on humorous caricatures are two different things.  I own copies of the Postal games myself, though admittedly I have yet to play them.  Perhaps they are insensitive but that isn't on the same level as *genuinely* "homicidal".  I think the target audiences are *completely* different.  Most of the people that enjoy "Angry Goy II" (and took part in its creation) and "Jesus Strikes Back" are actual homicidal, enraged bigots who actually want these terrible things to happen to entire groups of real people.  Many of them don't commit these acts themselves because they know they will go to prison, but if it was somehow legal, they would be popping off as many rounds as they could.  Mark my words.  The scary thing is that as what happened at Charlottesville Virginia, Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub and Los Vegas prove, sometimes for some of these people, the lines get blurred and they decided to just go ahead and pop off anyway and the only thing they are really waiting for is something to galvanize them and make them feel like their hatred is perfectly legitimate. 

So I personally find such games as "Angry Goy II" and "Jesus Strikes Back: Judgement Day" to be totally reprehensible and can absolutely understand activists going off on them.  I just don't think its the same kind of thing as the Postal franchise.  I will give the Postal games a try eventually and decide for myself, I guess.  But just to reiterate, to me there is a HUGE difference between letting off some steam and truly wanting real groups of people dead.

But one thing you won't find me doing is trying to shut those games down, as terrible as I find them, because I do believe in freedom of speech.  But that also means I feel free to express how I feel about them. 
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 10, 2019, 02:54:33 AM
I don't know about wether we should "let go" of some of these things. I'm neither gay nor jewish but I honestly cannot stand for trash like this having the title of videogame, it dishonors the genre and hurts people in more ways than one.
The problem, there's no objective definition of a good videogame. Taking down something like these will surely create a precedent for witch-hunting valid games not only like Postal, but anything that doesn't fit political correctness. So yeah, anynone is free to create a videogame as dreadful and dishonorable as he pleases, it's a side product of creative freedom, freedom of speech in gamedev area if you like.
I would rather let them sit here and watch who's playing, if the most auduence are wannabe homicidal bigots indeed, they will serve as a detector if anything. Or make mods that will bring some diversity into targets selection, which should be easy to do, because these games are usually built on engines like Unity. I'm sure the authors will find it funny, especially if a mod will become more popular than an original game.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Highwayman667 on May 11, 2019, 01:43:36 AM
The problem, there's no objective definition of a good videogame. Taking down something like these will surely create a precedent for witch-hunting valid games not only like Postal, but anything that doesn't fit political correctness. So yeah, anynone is free to create a videogame as dreadful and dishonorable as he pleases, it's a side product of creative freedom, freedom of speech in gamedev area if you like.

I don't know if anyone has suggested these games be banned... though it wouldn't cause any harm if they were.

The line isn't as blurry as people think, Postal seems to be an absurd game about random violence with some sick and dark humor included, it doesn't target specific individuals nor does it validate ideas related to hateful ideologies. If it's suddenly "Too PC" to call people out on their own immorality then we might as well give up on trying to make the world a more decent and fair place for everyone.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 11, 2019, 05:52:41 AM
There's no objective criteria for "sick and dark humor" as well. One man's humor is another's offence. These two are absurd enough, at least to me, to be counsidered an attempt (not the best, to say it politely) in such. If not the audience and the author, would never suspect it's anything but this.
I can also recall a Russian "Forest Warden" videogame, released circa early 2000's with a similar plot, the goal is to wipe an area from gays with very limited ammo supply, usually 1-2 rounds more than targets. Should you miss or go out of ammo, you're fvcked. It wasn't taken seriously, nor it meant so.

Should we start with these games, we will end up with Werewolf, because white supremacists crowd tend to favor this one, among other things.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: Highwayman667 on May 12, 2019, 03:43:04 PM
It wasn't taken seriously, nor it meant so.

And how sure are you about the latter ? Maybe it was meant to be taken seriously but didn't get the notoriety the developers wanted.

Should we start with these games, we will end up with Werewolf, because white supremacists crowd tend to favor this one, among other things.

White supremacists are supporting Werewolf ? Wut ?

And if we're talking about banning or denouncing some games, I wouldn't denounce Werewolf because the game's premise doesn't seem to be about targeting a specific group of individuals. Anyone can support any game. I'm pretty sure at least one hateful person supported Pillars of Eternity, and that game is amazing.
Title: Re: If this is what I think it is...
Post by: deicide on May 12, 2019, 08:36:26 PM
For the reason that it wasn't an officially released game, but a homebrew published under a nickname on some blogs and other resources. Should he wanted to, he could state openly just about anything without consequences, but nope. So, it could be safely assumed that the game is a brain fart of a bored office hamster for office hamsters, and it met its audience.

Edit: VtM emphasises the power of personality, which attracts some neo-Nazis. Werewolf is on the opposite side of spectrum, so it's of no surprise people who want to lose theirs to a crowd interested. Sure, Werewolf isn't supremacistic, but it provides a convinient framework for such games from the tribalistically/collectivistically thinking people's point of view. More so, there's a little actual difference between some nominally far-right and far-left ideologies.
I would call that "setting abuse".