EA Hosting Panel on Homophobia in Gaming

[Therumancer]

At any rate, in with those dozens of lines of text I have included a number of reasons in support of my beliefs. Granted none that you agree with, or have convinced you, but reasons none the less.

Namely I have explained that *I* believe gay men are far more interested in pre-sexual humans and more likely to attack little boys and such than say lesbians are likely to engage in sexual assault of pre-sexual girls.

Granting that for the sake of argument, doesn't it seem to you that men are are far more interested in pre-sexual humans and more likely to attack little humans and such than say women?

That's the question you keep dodging, and why people think you're homophobic. Or else you're sexist and you don't care about little girls. If you're truly interested in the opinion people have of you, don't make up strawmen in explaining why.

Are you trying to derail the thread into a flame war or something?

We've been over this before as well, and I'm pretty sure I've answered anything you've thrown at me up until the point I've left threads because it was getting repetitive. No need for "Strawmen", I'm not really debating in such a way that they are needed. I simply state my opinions, defend them to an extent, and if things seem to be going nowhere drop out of the conversation to avoid things getting too nasty since it's a contreversial topic.

Overall though you are probably correct that due to the mechanics of sex and how men derive pleasure there is more interest from an oppertunistic fashion from men. The male sex organ is simply far more ideal for taking sex by force, combined with men being intristically more agressive.

I'll even go so far as to say that there are more male sex offenders than women.

However, when it comes to the topic of "sexual assaults on children" I feel gay men are far more likely to/driven to do it. In general most "research" on the subject tends to take gays and go "well they are no more likely to molest children than heterosexual men are". But oftentimes such statistics when not politically slanted are compiled by using homosexuals in numbers including women (oftentimes neglecting a gender being mentioned in the pool of people being used). So basically you tend to wind up with more gay men involved in assaults on little boys than straight men attacking little girls because the numbers which are roughly parallel at least double when you remove the lesbians from the equasion.

Like it or not the gay rights movement has become a war, and about politics, as much as a search for truth. It involves people, and people will do anything not to be regulated. Tamper with information, spread propaganda, do whatever. Both sides ultimatly do it, but in general you only see one side in the media due to political correctness. People like me on the other hand don't really go by the studies and what other people tell us, but primarly by personal experience and such which is why I talk about groups like NAMBLA and how things actually are in the real world off of internet debates seeing as I had to deal with this stuff as a responder rather than someone interested in brownie points, or feel good left wing propaganda.

I'm sure you've got plenty of smart answers, ways of trying to turn this back on itself to make me look a fool (in your own mind), or whatever. Truthfully I'm not going to respond to it again, since this really isn't meant to be a retread of general gay rights arguements. I'm simply writing this (which I believe I've written before) to refute the point that I just "clam up" or have "nothing to say".

I have nothing to say that YOU AGREE WITH, that is something entirely differant.

>>>----Therumancer--->

 

[shaltir]

i'm confused as to why your sexual preference is relevant in Xboxlive anyway. it is just a freaking fetish...why are we making special rules for a fetish?!? next i can't make fun of fat people...

EDIT: on a serious note, i completely agree with some of the posters above me that crying foul at every little thing only widens the gap between gays and straights (also blacks and whites...but different thread for a different day i guess..). i for one really don't care if you are gay, but does it need a uniform to let me know?

This is exactly why the panel is needed. Being gay is not a fetish.

having sex in ways that are different is a fetish...i'm not saying its bad, but it isn't anything special either. and you may be surprised, but nobody really cares if you are gay or not.

 

[cobra_ky]

#1: My concern about "something major coming from this" is simply because I figure why bother otherwise? Assuming that nothing truely outrageous could happen because of the bottom line makes sense, until you look at the fact that the meeting *IS* apparently happening, someone is spending money to make it happen, and attendance implies that there is at least some interest in putting politics before pure profit.

politics and profit aren't mutually exclusive. demographics are shifting so that openly GLBT people are a growing market and companies are interested in exploiting that potential audience.

Arguably a lot of left wing ideas (not all of which have been bad) have gotten spread the same way, when those who believe the philsophy have taken personal hits to spread the message above and beyond simply promoting their own bottom line. I think a lot of baby boomers got into the media (and became successful at it) with the specific purpose of doing this.

i'm not sure why this is specific to left-wing politics. for every Ted Turner there's a Rupert Murdoch.

I guess the big question comes down to whether EA (and other companies) believe they will still make profits by getting political, even if the profits are less than normal. What's more if they get in on the winning side of a political movement (as much of a gamble as it might be), that can give them cred they can sell for decades to say "hey we're not souless capitolists" while exploiting the fanboys with their past glories.

i can't speak for every individual company's motivations, but microsoft's first approach was to try and avoid the issue completely by simply banning any mention of homosexuality on XBL. that leads me to believe that they're not suddenly going to be interested in furthering any kind of "gay agenda", especially without guaranteed profits.

as far as microsoft is concerned, they got some bad publicity because of that policy, and i'm guessing they're using this meeting as an opportunity, for both positive advertising and market research aimed at a growing potential market.

Honestly I wouldn't care that much, because I'm not so homophobic that I can't deal with anything with overt homosexuality in it (apologies to those who might think that). I just see it as being a truely horrendous direction for the game industry, since I use video games to get away from real world issues. I'm just as enthusiastic about the whole idea of big game companies taking on homophobia, as I was with Marvel Comics doing a whole company wide crossover event (Civil War) to express the political opinions of their management. In Marvel's case they produced a decent product, but all of the real world analogies and intentional political slants left a bad taste in my mouth. If Marvel can do this for a year or two to make a statement, I'd imagine a coalition of game companies can do something similar with other issues.

comics are sort of unique in that publishers establish a single universe which spans all their publications. few game companies i'm aware of work this way. and i can't see any reason why they'd want to work together with their competitors on this. you may be right that this meeting may result in more games espousing positive views of homosexuality. but there will always be plenty of games that don't.

#2: When it comes to Dumbledore, to be honest with you I don't believe JK Rowling ever said he was gay.

<a href=Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2007/10/19/2007-10-19_rowling_dubs_dumbledore_of_harry_potter_.html>A fan asked if Albus Dumbledore would find love some day, to which Rowling replied:

"Dumbledore is gay."

Of course then again I will also say that I think JK Rowling is a very differant person today than when her books first became successful. Today she strikes me as the sort who will do anything to squeeze a few more bucks out of the franchise despite already being obnoxiously rich. If she can dredge up contreversy without hurting the existing sales or fan base she is going to.

you're probably right, but regardless of her motivations, dumbledore was a non-stereotypical gay character whose sexuality was almost completely unobtrusive.

I think to an extent companies like EA are thinking they can make Homosexuality into an ongoing issue and use it the same way to both promote an agenda and make money. I could of course be wrong, but that is sort of what this whole meeting sounds like. I don't follow the music industry to the extent you do apparently, but I guess it would fit in with the entire trend, and simply make what this EA meeting is about simply a part of something going on overall.

exactly. but keep in mind there's a lot of people like yourself who don't respond favorably to homosexuality, and smart CEOs will be careful not to completely destroy their existing audience in pursuit of a new one.

 

[Daclunator]

I really don't care if the scout in tf2 likes it up the bum or if cortana licks carpet, people are generally people. Basically: WHO CARES IF YOU'RE GAY?!

-this message has been brought by a guy who is not very sympathetic and ignores all slander or laughs at it whenever he incounters it as well as being straight-

 

[squid5580]

I was attacked for being different. Isn't that what this whole discussion has been about? Does it really matter what sets one apart from any other when talking about something like this? Or do I need to belong to some specific media encouraged group with a fancy name before it applies to my situation.

It matters because you can't advocate a certain logic for how the law should work in one context and then ignore the implications of your logic for the rest of the law without a good reason.

I mean, that's what you're doing by expanding the discussion from "being attacked on the basis of one's sexuality" into "being attacked for being different." It would be much easier to deal with any of your arguments if I could just say back to you "if you get beat up for being a heterosexual, you should get the same protections as vice-versa."

That answer wouldn't have satisfied you though, right? So you expanded the discussion. I'm doing the same thing you did.

I believe I have already expressed my feelings about "hate crimes" which would be considered racist crimes. Unless of course you want to see people thrown in jail for saying a derogatory remark which I do believe would be unconstitutional. Freedom of expression and freedom of speech. I may not like what a raging racist pig has to say but be damned if they don't have the right to say it.

But they have the right to say it based on their freedom of speech. It's not like people have a freedom of assault that's being taken away by hate crimes.

I would love to live in a world where we all held hands and sang campfire songs. Where we could simply use our words to resolve our differences. Sure it would mean games and movies would be pretty boring but that is a small sacrifice. And whenever someone figures out what causes our violent urges and whatever else that causes this crap to happen, develops a drug and makes everyone in the world take it well we got to make the best with what we have. And so far the only thing we have is punishment.

Um, okay--but what does that have to do with anything?

Man did you forget everything from yesterday? The last paragraph was in response to this:

So? You told me "Umm no the reason is for a safer and civil society." A society where there was never a transgression in the first place is a safer and more civil one than one where the transgression is rectified.

So if it isn't because they are considered different by the attackers why are people targeted because of thier sexuality? Then for extra credit you can explain the difference between a racial attack and a homophobic one. Without pointing out the obvious because one is over race and the other is over sexual preference. And remember it can't have anything to do with the attacker considering the victim different.

 

[squid5580]

Homophobia in games? lolwut?

I can't think of many RPGs these days that either don't have delicious lesbian sex or strong hints of it. They're a bit behind on the man/man sex, although some games also let you do that. And the games that don't, certainly have modders that'll make sure it happens (I'm looking at YOU, Morrowind and Oblivion). Some even have incest to boot (Imoen Romance mod, why were you made?). It just sounds like it's an "I'm a special snowflake because I enjoy sexual relations with the same gender"-panel that'll lead exactly nowhere.

I just think that these guys forget that even though they're not always intended to, the various games are often bought for kids (just do a quick "how old were you when you played Doom?" poll). Game developers often leave real sexual content out for this reason and it shouldn't really come as a surprise that especially homosexuality will be left out, considering how many soccer moms react to it in regular media.

Personally, I don't care if the game will let you fuck the dog as well, people just need to remember that games need to make money before anything else.

Ok for the love of Pete this has nothing to do with homosexuals in games. Why on earth the author of this article didn't link what this is truly about baffles me. It comes down to 2 incidents that I know of (and there are probably more but this is from the Escapist's own news stories).

A guy names Richard Gaywood (well I think his name was Richard) got banned or something because he had the word Gay in his XBL gamertag. He was reinstated (and probably with alot of cool swag) once he proved that the word GAY was a part of his real name.

A lesbian was eventually banned after she stated she was a lesbian in her profile. This was after she recieved tons of threats and harassing messages. Due to the fact it is clearly stated in Microsoft's Code and Conduct not to do that this should have been a non issue. Since she is a part of the homosexual community some considered this action as homophobic on MS's part this divided the gaming community into 3 parts.

1. She violated the rules and got what she had coming.

2. OMG that is so homophobic on MS's part and they should have banned everyone who sent her the messages, harrassed her online ect ect. She should be allowed to say she is a lesbian since it is a part of who she is. That is a stupid rule.

and of course

3. Who cares lets play Halo

Damn I really wish I remembered the title of the article.

 

[squid5580]

I would love to live in a world where we all held hands and sang campfire songs. Where we could simply use our words to resolve our differences. Sure it would mean games and movies would be pretty boring but that is a small sacrifice. And whenever someone figures out what causes our violent urges and whatever else that causes this crap to happen, develops a drug and makes everyone in the world take it well we got to make the best with what we have. And so far the only thing we have is punishment.

Um, okay--but what does that have to do with anything?

Man did you forget everything from yesterday? The last paragraph was in response to this:

So? You told me "Umm no the reason is for a safer and civil society." A society where there was never a transgression in the first place is a safer and more civil one than one where the transgression is rectified.

Oh, okay--then what does any of that have to do with you saying that crimes that can be rectified should have a sentence that is less of a deterrent than ones that can? If your imagined scenario is the ultimate deterrence short of torture, why not use it in every case?

In fact, why NOT use torture?

Easy say someone steals 1000 bucks from you. Would you rather get the money back or have them rot in prison for the rest of thier lives? You won't get it back if they are in jail.

And if you start torturing how are you any better than the criminals you torture?

 

[Therumancer]

"Safe spaces for LGBT people online?" Are they going to set up homosexual only game servers?

Well, in general I think the issue is a lot of homosexuals getting offended by people's attitudes. But then again that is part of a free country, you don't have to like everyone or remain silent about your dislike.

However, setting up homosexual only servers wouldn't be the right thing to do, and there would be no way to accomplish it anyway.

In general safe spaces already exist, it's called your /ignore function. Make anywhere your own safe space!

I could be wrong (since I reflexively disable mine) but I believe the obsenity filter covers most "gay" words used as insults.

As I mentioned before I think the intent of this panel is more agenda based than anything. But, as Cobra_Ky pointed out, that remains to be seen as it would cost them a lot of business to promote that agenda, it all depends on whether they are willing to put politics ahead of maximized profit.

 

[cobra_ky]

Ok for the love of Pete this has nothing to do with homosexuals in games. Why on earth the author of this article didn't link what this is truly about baffles me.

he did. both incidents you mention were linked in the first paragraph:

but recent news [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.90841] has shown that the issue of how to handle homophobia

it's a shame that very few people seemed to notice, since most of seem to have no understanding of what the issues are.

2. OMG that is so homophobic on MS's part and they should have banned everyone who sent her the messages, harrassed her online ect ect. She should be allowed to say she is a lesbian since it is a part of who she is. That is a stupid rule.

i'm not sure i'd call microsoft homophobic, (although others have [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/90426-Designer-Accuses-Microsoft-Of-Homophobia])
but it IS a stupid rule. it's intended to protect homosexuals from discrimination, yet the rule itself is discriminatory.

 

[Chicago Ted]

Ya, I agree. There shall now be a new policy for online shooters and other online games. We shall call it the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy. Here are the rules. Shut up about personal opinions and preferences and just play the damned game!

"don't ask, don't tell" has been such a disastrous policy for the american military, i can't imagine why we should want it implemented anywhere else.

It's a joke. If you looked at my previous post on this and the guy I am replying too, you would notice my response for this matter is why the hell are you even talking about your sexuality over a game online? It's stupid and shouldn't be talked about. Hence me saying that it should be the don't ask don't tell policy. Why does the person who you are playing in Halo 3 really need to know what you prefer. It comes across as rude and pushy. That's why no one should be talking about it in the first place and thus make events like these completely unnessecary.

Also, a word of advice next time, check the whole post before using only part of it. You have taken me out of context here and are thus using what I said in a way I did not mean. Don't do it again.

 

[bug_chaser]

i'm confused as to why your sexual preference is relevant in Xboxlive anyway. it is just a freaking fetish...why are we making special rules for a fetish?!? next i can't make fun of fat people...

EDIT: on a serious note, i completely agree with some of the posters above me that crying foul at every little thing only widens the gap between gays and straights (also blacks and whites...but different thread for a different day i guess..). i for one really don't care if you are gay, but does it need a uniform to let me know?

This is exactly why the panel is needed. Being gay is not a fetish.

having sex in ways that are different is a fetish...i'm not saying its bad, but it isn't anything special either. and you may be surprised, but nobody really cares if you are gay or not.

Again, being gay is not a fetish. You're trying to make sexual orientation into a choice or a strong interest. It's not. And plenty of people do care-this thread is loaded with hateful and bigoted comments from hateful and bigoted people.

 

[shaltir]

i'm confused as to why your sexual preference is relevant in Xboxlive anyway. it is just a freaking fetish...why are we making special rules for a fetish?!? next i can't make fun of fat people...

EDIT: on a serious note, i completely agree with some of the posters above me that crying foul at every little thing only widens the gap between gays and straights (also blacks and whites...but different thread for a different day i guess..). i for one really don't care if you are gay, but does it need a uniform to let me know?

This is exactly why the panel is needed. Being gay is not a fetish.

having sex in ways that are different is a fetish...i'm not saying its bad, but it isn't anything special either. and you may be surprised, but nobody really cares if you are gay or not.

Again, being gay is not a fetish. You're trying to make sexual orientation into a choice or a strong interest. It's not. And plenty of people do care-this thread is loaded with hateful and bigoted comments from hateful and bigoted people.

i'm not hateful nor bigoted. and i agree, you guys deserve the same rights as everyone else, but it gets taken too far with the gay pride parades and stores. there is a difference of wanting equal rights and wanting everyone to cater to your sexuality.

and for the record, stop stealing our stuff...i want the rainbow, the superman logo and key west back dangit!!

 

[GothmogII]

i'm confused as to why your sexual preference is relevant in Xboxlive anyway. it is just a freaking fetish...why are we making special rules for a fetish?!? next i can't make fun of fat people...

EDIT: on a serious note, i completely agree with some of the posters above me that crying foul at every little thing only widens the gap between gays and straights (also blacks and whites...but different thread for a different day i guess..). i for one really don't care if you are gay, but does it need a uniform to let me know?

This is exactly why the panel is needed. Being gay is not a fetish.

having sex in ways that are different is a fetish...i'm not saying its bad, but it isn't anything special either. and you may be surprised, but nobody really cares if you are gay or not.

Again, being gay is not a fetish. You're trying to make sexual orientation into a choice or a strong interest. It's not. And plenty of people do care-this thread is loaded with hateful and bigoted comments from hateful and bigoted people.

i'm not hateful nor bigoted. and i agree, you guys deserve the same rights as everyone else, but it gets taken too far with the gay pride parades and stores. there is a difference of wanting equal rights and wanting everyone to cater to your sexuality.

and for the record, stop stealing our stuff...i want the rainbow, the superman logo and key west back dangit!!

Just curious, what do you mean by being catered too? If a town, or store, or company -agrees- to allow or host an event, isn't that the same as any other group who would request to do the same? Our library hosts a music club every Tuesday, am I to take from that that the library 'unfairly' caters to musicians because this means they close early on a Tuesday?

 

[Therumancer]

As I mentioned before I think the intent of this panel is more agenda based than anything.

Uh, it states right in the article: "a conversation about combating homophobia online." Why would you think it's anything but agenda based after reading that?

But, as Cobra_Ky pointed out, that remains to be seen as it would cost them a lot of business to promote that agenda,

Why do you say that? The kind of people who will be offended by promoting this 'agenda' AND are video game customers are in general the kind of people who only do what they do out of ignorance and immaturity, not some kind of deep-seated core values.

People who yell "fag" every other second online are still going to go buy Madden; the kind of people who make up the target demographics for things like Second Life and The Sims are probably on board with that agenda.

For every customer this turns away, it'll draw in at least two.

it all depends on whether they are willing to put politics ahead of maximized profit.

I think this IS them maximizing their profit. I think you're just engaging in wishful thinking: the reality is, I don't think your demographic is the market you believe it to be.

Well again we will have to agree to disagree. Simply put I do not believe that there are 2 people who are pro gay for every 1 that is anti-gay, despite the image the liberal media would like to present. It's simply that the media gives one side an effective platform, and does not give one to the other side, strives to create a certain illusion, and hopes that like most propaganda it will take.

Your typical gamer will get pretty bloody upset if there is any suggestion that they are seriously gay, and while not nessicarly a true innuendo calling someone by gay slurs is a form of insult for a reason.

My talk about an agenda is more along the lines of me doubting that the panel is simply to discuss anti-gay sentiments online through trash talking, and more along the lines of pushing a pro-gay agenda, inserting more homosexual characters into games, and things like that.

Generally speaking, even if I wasn't as anti-gay as I was I'd have an issue with this. The last thing I need is to see the industry agreeing to tack extraneous gay characters into everything despite their existance as a minority. Affirmitive action tends to ruin anything and everything it touches and I protest it on principle even when it's for a cause I do agree with.