Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Casual Shinji]

I dunno about that. A lot of the plot is driven by Ellies sexuality which doesn't come up with "straight" characters. And to be fair I think a lot of characters are left ambiguous because their sexuality is meaningless and therefore the player can determine that if they wish. Does it help you enjoy the character better if Mario is gay, then go for it. There is nothing that counters that stance.

A lot of the plot is driven by Ellie being in a relationship, not her sexuality. Not once is the word 'lesbian' or 'bi' even uttered. Just that her being in a relationship reminds the player of her sexuality, but her sexuality doesn't drive the plot.

Also, within the first hour of the game we have references to Jesse and Dina having been a thing, same with Abby and Owen, and Owen and Mel expecting. Then there's Manny who's all about hooking up, there's a scene where some girl sent a nude picture to a guy. And all of this was straight, yet still to a lot of people it was the gayness that was shoved in their faces.

A large part of Abby's story is equally driven by her (past) relationship.

 

[Trunkage]

And even once it gets firmly quashed officially, the defence can still give knowing looks to the jury and hopefully get their sympathies that way.

It's like that time when I found out that legal slavery was happening in the US until 1942

 

[CriticalGaming]

A lot of the plot is driven by Ellie being in a relationship, not her sexuality. Not once is the word 'lesbian' or 'bi' even uttered. Just that her being in a relationship reminds the player of her sexuality, but her sexuality doesn't drive the plot.

Also, within the first hour of the game we have references to Jesse and Dina having been a thing, same with Abby and Owen, and Owen and Mel expecting. Then there's Manny who's all about hooking up, there's a scene where some girl sent a nude picture to a guy. And all of this was straight, yet still to a lot of people it was the gayness that was shoved in their faces.

A large part of Abby's story is equally driven by her (past) relationship.

What? Hardly anything of the plot is driven by Ellie's sexuality.

Some of it is driven by her relationship. Which isn't the same thing, and is true for countless straight characters to an equal or greater degree.

Ok if you want to slice it like that, but to me that's semantics. Ellie's story is driven by her sexuality because that relationship is a same sex relationship. A lot of Ellie's plot and character goes away if Dina becomes a man. And the game does a lot to make sure the player is very much aware that Ellie is gay. Though I do find it interesting that they weren't willing to show two girls fucking, but were happy to show HERcules fucking her dumbass boycrush. Even a LBGT ally studio like Naughty Dog they still wouldn't go that far with the scenes. Ellie's sex scene is implied and Abby's is directly shown, there is even a few frams of Abby's Muscletitty but they wouldn't show anything of Dina or Ellie.

So that's why I link the relationship and sexuality together.

Sexuality even in games where relationships are possible, almost never use that as a plot point. The relationship stuff is almost always a side thing and optional. Like Mass Effect style games. This is likely due to the choices that the player can make across the entire cast, but still it does highlight that a characters sexuality shouldn't really be that important to overall things, because no matter who you love you deal with the same shit as everyone else. The LBGT stuff is the icing on the character cake, not the whole flavor.....if tha tmakes sense.

 

[Buyetyen]

The LBGT stuff is the icing on the character cake, not the whole flavor.....if tha tmakes sense.

The problem is that you're applying it in such a way that queer characters have to be borderline in the closet before you consider them acceptable.

 

[Silvanus]

Ok if you want to slice it like that, but to me that's semantics. Ellie's story is driven by her sexuality because that relationship is a same sex relationship. A lot of Ellie's plot and character goes away if Dina becomes a man.

No, nonono. It's not semantics at all; it's a fundamental difference. If someone's plot is driven by a straight relationship, you wouldn't say that plot is "driven by heterosexuality". The orientation of the relationship isn't the important bit.

The vast majority of Ellie's story remains exactly the same if she was straight.

And the game does a lot to make sure the player is very much aware that Ellie is gay. Though I do find it interesting that they weren't willing to show two girls fucking, but were happy to show HERcules fucking her dumbass boycrush. Even a LBGT ally studio like Naughty Dog they still wouldn't go that far with the scenes. Ellie's sex scene is implied and Abby's is directly shown, there is even a few frams of Abby's Muscletitty but they wouldn't show anything of Dina or Ellie.

So that's why I link the relationship and sexuality together.

Of course the player is "aware". Just like you're "aware" a character is straight if they have an opposite sex partner. But noone says the game is going out of its way to make a point of sexuality if its straight. You just barely even register it.

There's absolutely nothing TLOU does that straight characters don't do 100 times as frequently and as obviously.

Sexuality even in games where relationships are possible, almost never use that as a plot point. The relationship stuff is almost always a side thing and optional. Like Mass Effect style games. This is likely due to the choices that the player can make across the entire cast, but still it does highlight that a characters sexuality shouldn't really be that important to overall things, because no matter who you love you deal with the same shit as everyone else. The LBGT stuff is the icing on the character cake, not the whole flavor.....if tha tmakes sense.

But game writers already aren't making it the whole flavour. They're actually treating gay characters muuuuch more standoffishly than straight characters. But you're noticing it more and objecting more when it's gay.

 

[Hawki]

Ok if you want to slice it like that, but to me that's semantics. Ellie's story is driven by her sexuality because that relationship is a same sex relationship. A lot of Ellie's plot and character goes away if Dina becomes a man. And the game does a lot to make sure the player is very much aware that Ellie is gay. Though I do find it interesting that they weren't willing to show two girls fucking, but were happy to show HERcules fucking her dumbass boycrush. Even a LBGT ally studio like Naughty Dog they still wouldn't go that far with the scenes. Ellie's sex scene is implied and Abby's is directly shown, there is even a few frams of Abby's Muscletitty but they wouldn't show anything of Dina or Ellie.

So that's why I link the relationship and sexuality together.

Sexuality even in games where relationships are possible, almost never use that as a plot point. The relationship stuff is almost always a side thing and optional. Like Mass Effect style games. This is likely due to the choices that the player can make across the entire cast, but still it does highlight that a characters sexuality shouldn't really be that important to overall things, because no matter who you love you deal with the same shit as everyone else. The LBGT stuff is the icing on the character cake, not the whole flavor.....if tha tmakes sense.

Look, I don't really have a horse in this race, but all of this just comes off as "gay characters are fine as long as there's nothing to indicate that they're gay."

Also:

-If Naughty Dog showed a hetrosexual couple having intercourse, but not a homosexual couple, that actually doesn't really paint ND in a good like. It suggests a double standard. Not necessarily, as I don't know the context, but...

-The whole "relationships are fine, sexuality isn't" comes off as semantics. You're right that many games have optional romance, but focusing on just those with built-in romance, the reason that het. pairings aren't considered sexualized is that het. pairings are the 'default.' Too many times, I've seen the complaint of "indoctrination" or "sexualization" for same sex pairings, but not opposite sex pairings. That's not to say that there aren't complaints about in-game romance being part of the plot, but it's not really the sexuality that's being criticized. For instance, using Overwatch as an example, I would bet actual money that if Tracer's romantic partner was named "Emile" rather than "Emily," then there wouldn't be the uproar of "the LGBT agenda" and Russia banning the comic in its territory, or someone from the Philipines asking me whether in the West, girls kissing on the lips is potentially a sign of non-romantic feeling (yes, this actually happened to me).

I know we've had this conversation before, but even as someone who's straight, I can see the double standard applied to romance in media here. To use a very recent example, it's telling that a number of people are threatening to boycott Lightyear for apparently featuring a lesbian kiss (and therefore, "the gay agenda"), yet were apparently fine with Pixar's very first film where Bo-Peep kisses Woody at the end. A LOT. Was that promoting a "straight agenda?"

Thing is, there actually are cases where people do look too hard for LGBT elements, even going against the author's own statements (take Luca), but even so, shippers gonna ship regardless. But overall, there's a level of scrutiny given towards same sex couples in fiction that opposite sex couples don't have to put up with. Not to the same extent at least.

 

[CriticalGaming]

The problem is that you're applying it in such a way that queer characters have to be borderline in the closet before you consider them acceptable.

Not at all.

For example, let's use Jack Reacher as an example. Everything about the show can stay the same because it's a pretty good show from what I've heard. Except Jack comes home to Steven after a day of being a badass, they could even kiss, have dinner dates, whatever. The idea is that this guy does all this badass shit and it just so happens that he goes home to a husband and it's played offso normally that the audience doesn't even register as anything is off.

The idea is that if you treat his homosexuality as such a normal thing, then it will become normal for the audience and people will stop caring about it. By normalizing it, it becomes no big deal and thus accepted. Am I off base?

 

[CriticalGaming]

Of course the player is "aware". Just like you're "aware" a character is straight if they have an opposite sex partner. But noone says the game is going out of its way to make a point of sexuality if its straight. You just barely even register it.

See my post above about Jack Reacher. You make a valid point here, and I think i make an example above of how to play LBGT characters the same way so that we (as a general "we") make it just as normal as a hetero relationship.

The flaw with Ellie's relationship is not just that she's gay, but that the game makes it such a big point. Rather that just putting her in the relationship with Dina and treating it like it's nothing special. Because media treats LBGT relationships with so much "ooohh look at how gay the are" it stands out. Whereas in my Reacher example, the relationship would just be there and the show would hardly make a mention of it. By treating it like no big deal and normal, the audience would also begin to see it as normal and no big deal and thus gradually begin to do as you say and not even register that the relationship is any different from any other relationship.

 

[Hawki]

The idea is that if you treat his homosexuality as such a normal thing, then it will become normal for the audience and people will stop caring about it. By normalizing it, it becomes no big deal and thus accepted. Am I off base?

For what it's worth, I agree with you, but the problem is, even treating homosexuality as normal, twats still go into a frenzy.

That said, I don't think there's any better alternative. People got used to interracial couples (though depressingly enough, most resistance to such couples comes from the regressive left rather than a racist right these days), they can get used to same sex couples as well. I'm not saying that stories can't/shouldn't exist that deal with homosexuality specifically, but I think a universalist approach is much better than an identitarian one, no matter how unpopular an opinion that is in some circles.

 

[BrawlMan]

Talk about stretching the goal post and being in denial. There's a reason why I consider this thread a joke.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Ok if you want to slice it like that, but to me that's semantics. Ellie's story is driven by her sexuality because that relationship is a same sex relationship. A lot of Ellie's plot and character goes away if Dina becomes a man.

No? Ellie's plot is her wanting revenge and giving up her relationship and frienships in the process, and her character is that of an edgelord. How would Dina being a man change any of that?

And the game does a lot to make sure the player is very much aware that Ellie is gay. Though I do find it interesting that they weren't willing to show two girls fucking, but were happy to show HERcules fucking her dumbass boycrush. Even a LBGT ally studio like Naughty Dog they still wouldn't go that far with the scenes. Ellie's sex scene is implied and Abby's is directly shown, there is even a few frams of Abby's Muscletitty but they wouldn't show anything of Dina or Ellie.

What does the game very much do to make sure the player knows Ellie is gay? Is it that one encounter with the drunk guy? Because that's pretty much it. That's the only in-story mention of Ellie's sexuality. That and one optional moment in a bookstore, and Joel at one point thinking there's something between her and Jesse and Ellie quickly trying to shut that down. Other than that the only other way it makes clear that Ellie is gay is because she's in a relationship with a girl who accompanies her on her journey.

As for why show one sex scene and not the other, who knows. Maybe they thought it was more important to show Ellie and Dina making the step as opposed to showing the step, and maybe they thought it was important to show the whole 'dam bursting, love/hate' thing between Abby and Owen. They also show Ellie and Dina enjoying eachother's company afterward while Abby and Owen just fell asleep. Is that commentary on gay relationships versus straight ones? Or is this scrutiny just kinda silly?

So that's why I link the relationship and sexuality together.

Sexuality even in games where relationships are possible, almost never use that as a plot point. The relationship stuff is almost always a side thing and optional. Like Mass Effect style games. This is likely due to the choices that the player can make across the entire cast, but still it does highlight that a characters sexuality shouldn't really be that important to overall things, because no matter who you love you deal with the same shit as everyone else. The LBGT stuff is the icing on the character cake, not the whole flavor.....if tha tmakes sense.

Uncharted 4 says hello. Is that game using Nate's sexuality to drive most of the plot, seeing as it hinges on him lying to his wife, her finding out, and ultimately them reconciling? Uncharted 2 and 3 also show many points where Nate and Elena are together and that they are "together". Hey, remember every scene where Nate and Chloe were together in Uncharted 2, and pretty much every other line was them flrting with eachother?

So in what way does Ellie and Dina being gay trump that other than that they're gay together?

 

[Silvanus]

See my post above about Jack Reacher. You make a valid point here, and I think i make an example above of how to play LBGT characters the same way so that we (as a general "we") make it just as normal as a hetero relationship.

The flaw with Ellie's relationship is not just that she's gay, but that the game makes it such a big point. Rather that just putting her in the relationship with Dina and treating it like it's nothing special. Because media treats LBGT relationships with so much "ooohh look at how gay the are" it stands out. Whereas in my Reacher example, the relationship would just be there and the show would hardly make a mention of it. By treating it like no big deal and normal, the audience would also begin to see it as normal and no big deal and thus gradually begin to do as you say and not even register that the relationship is any different from any other relationship.

But the game literally doesn't treat it as anything special or particular. There's one small scene at the start where someone insults her about it so Joel defends her, and that scene is obviously more about Ellie's relationship with Joel than anything else. Then it goes uncommented for the remaining 95% of the game.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

It's like that time when I found out that legal slavery was happening in the US until 1942

I mean, it's still legal *now*. It's just distasteful, so we voluntold some prisoners for $1/day and play pretend

 

[Buyetyen]

The idea is that if you treat his homosexuality as such a normal thing, then it will become normal for the audience and people will stop caring about it. By normalizing it, it becomes no big deal and thus accepted. Am I off base?

That's what a lot of creators are trying to do, by portraying gay relationships in the same way they would straight ones, but you keep complaining anyway.

 

[tstorm823]

On a different topic.

I apologize if someone already made this comment, as this thread is on a sprint and I'm not keeping up entirely, but "increase by 50%" is comically vague. Are they flipping a 60-40 margin the opposite direction, or are they hiring a third woman to go with the other 2?

 

[Trunkage]

I apologize if someone already made this comment, as this thread is on a sprint and I'm not keeping up entirely, but "increase by 50%" is comically vague. Are they flipping a 60-40 margin the opposite direction, or are they hiring a third woman to go with the other 2?

Agreed. it's sounds like pharmaceutical companies pretending results

I'd also be fine Acti-Blizz just doing it and not needing to tell anyone

 

[Trunkage]

I mean, it's still legal *now*. It's just distasteful, so we voluntold some prisoners for $1/day and play pretend

Fair enough. FDR only banned the use of saying it's slavery as a defence in court for 'not-slavery'

 

[Agema]

I apologize if someone already made this comment, as this thread is on a sprint and I'm not keeping up entirely, but "increase by 50%" is comically vague. Are they flipping a 60-40 margin the opposite direction, or are they hiring a third woman to go with the other 2?

Someone's got serve food in the canteen and mop the floors. That's one way they might get that 50% increase.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

1) law enforcement sometimes cant always get an initial response right. This sort of things hasn't happened in the OSCARS for 50 year. I was not surprised that anyone was not ready to deal with a situation like this but that part of your criticism has some merit, because perhaps they should have. An immediate reaction would have been nice but I'm not surprised they weren't ready
2) Being charge with assault and battery would be nice. Yes, I understand Ukraine is going on, but surely we can do this too

I very much doubt the Oscars don't have security. Maybe not actual law enforcement but they at least have security to hold someone until law enforcement can take them. To me, it should be up to Chris Rock to have Will Smith charged. I believe I saw you can get charged without the other person pressing charges. Regardless, Will Smith should face whatever legal consequences someone doing that at say Walmart would face, nothing more, nothing less. No special treatment but no excessive punishment to set an example because it's Will Smith vs say Tom Smith.

No, not at all. Teaching about red-lining is not critical race theory.

Red-lining may not be exactly critical race theory but it's like 90% of it as it's basically a fancy term for systemic racism.

 

[Trunkage]

Red-lining may not be exactly critical race theory but it's like 90% of it as it's basically a fancy term for systemic racism.

Well, I would say systematic racism is usually accidental. Like home loan interest rates change based on your credit history. It's way harder to get a home loan when you or your parents (as a potential guarantor) had little chance to create a credit history. The intent is to make appropriate loan choices and mitigate risk but ends up hurting minorities disproportionately. No one is intentionally doing this

This is opposed to specific bankers who believe minorities are untrustworthy with money so refuse loans. They can even abuse that interest rate/credit history convention. Or other parts red lining, which are very deliberate and targeted.

And it can be hard to disassemble what part is happening when.

Edit: To be clear, I feel systemic is about laws and not people, even though it might cause people to act in a racist way. The root cause is not the person being racist, its when a law/tradition is (or more likely can be abused)