GLaDOS and The Sniper Join Up To Support GaymerX2

[stonemaskstoryteller]

Wether or not a Convention for this or that is 'necessary' is just an odd question. It's not like we can only have a limited number of conventions a year, thus we must only choose conventions that are, well, conventional.

Having a fun and open event where LGBT topics in gaming can be discussed, or an event where gay (and straight couples!) can hold hands while they peruse the artist alley without fear of being pointed out is a good enough reason to hold these kinds of events. Even if it wasn't, People who want to go to them will still go to them, regardless of what others people think and therefore should do. You don't make decisions for anyone, only yourself.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Not sure if a homosexual focused gaming convention is really necessary. All I mean by that is that this is 2014 and most gaming conventions should be pretty accepting of that sort of thing, to the point where a gay focused ones just feels a little redundant. Then again there's a lot of real world trolls out there so I could be wrong.

Should be accepting, the key word is should

Should be accepting, the key word is should

Unfortunately, the gaming community (and a large number of other communities) is still homophobic to a large degree

Even just in general life, I often read (AL Subreddit...) about people getting screamed at by their parents, thrown out, etc. for being gay. We're not living that idealistic "everyone is a chill person" dream...

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

OP: As stated previously, I don't know why this is needed. I can't seriously think that it really matters whether or not your character in minecraft is straight or gay.

 

[Phasmal]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

Gamers are tolerant? Since when?

Ok, I'm not gonna argue this point, because I think it's subjective, but I know there are a lot of people who would argue that gamers are not nearly as tolerant as we all like to think.

OT: This is cool. I love Ellen Mclain, she's the best. I want to go to a con.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

Gamers are tolerant? Since when?
Ok, I'm not gonna argue this point, because I think it's subjective, but I know there are a lot of people who would argue that gamers are not nearly as tolerant as we all like to think.

They could argue that, but they would most likely be arguing about acceptance, where as I am referring to tolerance. Just because you tolerate something doesn't mean that you have to like or agree with it.

 

[Phasmal]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

Gamers are tolerant? Since when?
Ok, I'm not gonna argue this point, because I think it's subjective, but I know there are a lot of people who would argue that gamers are not nearly as tolerant as we all like to think.

They could argue that, but they would most likely be arguing about acceptance, where as I am referring to tolerance. Just because you tolerate something doesn't mean that you have to like or agree with it.

OR, some people feel like they are not really being -tolerated- because they're still suffering with shit. That could have been the point I was making.

Either way, I'm not really into arguing this- so meh. I still think this is subjective based on your experience.

 

[Bombiz]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

Gamers are tolerant? Since when?

Ok, I'm not gonna argue this point, because I think it's subjective, but I know there are a lot of people who would argue that gamers are not nearly as tolerant as we all like to think.

OT: This is cool. I love Ellen Mclain, she's the best. I want to go to a con.

i guess it depends on which community you look in. i know that "small" communities like the total war community or the mount and blade community are more accepting then "big" communities like the League of Legends or CoD community.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

Gamers are tolerant? Since when?
Ok, I'm not gonna argue this point, because I think it's subjective, but I know there are a lot of people who would argue that gamers are not nearly as tolerant as we all like to think.

They could argue that, but they would most likely be arguing about acceptance, where as I am referring to tolerance. Just because you tolerate something doesn't mean that you have to like or agree with it.

OR, some people feel like they are not really being -tolerated- because they're still suffering with shit. That could have been the point I was making.

And your point still seems to mistake tolerance for acceptance.

To give an example of what I'm referring to, just look at my stance towards Final Fantasy style combat in video games. I personally dislike FF style fighting where its turn-based. I've said many times that I don't like this style and that I think its dumb, outdated, and something that has no place in modern games. However, I tolerate FF and other JRPG's using this style. I don't like turn-based combat, but I put up with it- I tolerate it.

I still think this is subjective based on your experience.

No, the only thing "subjective" is your use of word "tolerance" as a synonym for the word "acceptance". The two are not the same.

To quote a gay character(Mr. Garrison) from South Park on the subject of tolerance:

"Tolerant, but not stupid! Look, just because you have to tolerate something doesn't mean you have to approve of it. Tolerate means you're just putting up with it. You tolerate a crying child sitting next to you on the airplane or, or you tolerate a bad cold. It can still piss you off!"​

 

[Seydaman]

Accepting? Why should be have to be accepting? Why isn't it enough that we are tolerant?

OP: As stated previously, I don't know why this is needed. I can't seriously think that it really matters whether or not your character in minecraft is straight or gay.

No, it isn't enough just be tolerant.

It's a part of morality based upon empathy (or at least sympathy)

While in your world it may seem perfectly irrelevant if your Minecraft character is gay, straight, pansexual, a potato, or whatever else, your world is not the world everyone else has. When I can still read stories about gay couples getting murdered [http://elixher.com/breaking-black-lesbian-couple-found-dead-in-galveston-county-texas/] and other people getting thrown out, verbally abused by their parents, and trying to kill themselves because their parents now despise them, acting like safe spaces are unnecessary is at best naive.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

No, it isn't enough just be tolerant.

It's a part of morality based upon empathy (or at least sympathy)

Who's morality? Yours?

While in your world it may seem perfectly irrelevant if your Minecraft character is gay, straight, pansexual, a potato, or whatever else, your world is not the world everyone else has. When I can still read stories about gay couples getting murdered [http://elixher.com/breaking-black-lesbian-couple-found-dead-in-galveston-county-texas/] and other people getting thrown out, verbally abused by their parents, and trying to kill themselves because their parents now despise them, acting like safe spaces are unnecessary is at best naive.

Why exactly do video games have to be the place for those "safe places"? Why should gamers have to do this when video games are not the cause of people being murdered or disowned? If I want to play GTA, COD, Halo, ect, why should I have to be dragged into political discourse about LGBT issues when I just want to play the next COD game? I'm not saying you can't have these places, just that video games being that "safe place" makes about as much sense as having a library at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean- it isn't best place for it.

 

[Silvanus]

snip

I wrote out a response, but posting it would continue this argument in a thread which doesn't deserve it.

This is not the place to post about how non-acceptance of LGBT people is all fine and good. If there should be one thread without that kind of thing, this should be it.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Awesome! ^^ Yay GLaDOS.

I wish I could afford a flight to San Fransisco so I could attend. Ah well.

inb4 thread descends into arguments about whether or not gay gamers deserve a convention

er... well, at least I'm on page 1 before things get really bad. **sigh**

 

[JazzJack2]

Awesome! ^^ Yay GLaDOS.

I wish I could afford a flight to San Fransisco so I could attend. Ah well.

inb4 thread descends into arguments about whether or not gay gamers deserve a convention

er... well, at least I'm on page 1 before things get really bad. **sigh**

I don't think it's about whether they deserve it or not, it's more about what the purpose of having it is? I mean if people want to hold/attend a convention for gaymers they're free do to so but even as someone who is gay I really don't see the point in it. I mean my sexuality and my gaming habits rarely crossover, I ain't a gay gamer but a gamer who is gay (if that makes sense.) and so if I was to attend any convention I would go to a Gaming convention not a Gayming convention.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I wrote out a response, but posting it would continue this argument in a thread which doesn't deserve it.

This is not the place to post about how non-acceptance of LGBT people is all fine and good. If there should be one thread without that kind of thing, this should be it.

"how non-acceptance of LGBT people is all fine and good"

You can try to "re-frame"[footnote]I know you mean well, so I'm not going to accuse you of strawmaning.[/footnote] it however you like, but I wasn't talking about "non-acceptance"(i.e. telling LGBT they can't play video games), I was talking about how tolerance isn't equivalent to acceptance. If you look at what I have said in this thread, you'll notice that not once did I ever state that their shouldn't be tolerance to LGBT people.

inb4 thread descends into arguments about whether or not gay gamers deserve a convention

er... well, at least I'm on page 1 before things get really bad. **sigh**

Absolutely, because any form of a dissenting opinion should be considered "descend[ing] into [an] argument"! How horrible that there might be conversation and that not everybody agrees to fall in line and conform! It's almost as if these people with different opinions were individual human beings!*

*FYI, that's all sarcasm.

 

[Silvanus]

"how non-acceptance of LGBT people is all fine and good." You can try to re-frame it however you like, but I wasn't talking about "non-acceptance"(ie telling LGBT they can't play video games), I was talking about how tolerance isn't equivalent to acceptance. Its really not that hard to grasp.

I wasn't trying to re-frame anything, I was just trying to end it. This isn't the thread for this. This is just meant to be talking about something positive.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

"how non-acceptance of LGBT people is all fine and good." You can try to re-frame it however you like, but I wasn't talking about "non-acceptance"(ie telling LGBT they can't play video games), I was talking about how tolerance isn't equivalent to acceptance. Its really not that hard to grasp.

I wasn't trying to re-frame anything, I was just trying to end it. This isn't the thread for this. This is just meant to be talking about something positive.

I just edited that post, so please take a look at it.

Now then...

It becomes part of the thread when I'm told that these conventions are needed because of non-video game related issues and how its now the responsibility of video games to create "safe places". The idea that video games should be the answer for issues in places like Uganda is such a bizarre concept, that it begs the question, "why exactly should video games of all things be the place to create "safe places" for people who face discrimination in places like Uganda?". Surely you can understand why it might seem weird to see people claim that video games should be responsible for non-video game related issues, and that giving video games that responsibility for "safe places" comes off as confusing to some of us?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

I don't think it's about whether they deserve it or not,

The purpose of GaymerX2 Con has been well explained and defended elsewhere, so I won't get into it (even though you did). I will say, however, that my use of the word "deserve" intentional and meant to be read with a great deal of annoyance and directed sarcasm.

Or, to quote the Simpsons, "That was the Joke."

 

[Vigormortis]

THEY'RE HUSBAND AND WIFE?!!!!

Yup. They worked on the Half-Life 2 games as well. She's obviously the higher-profile of the two thanks to her work as GLaDOS, but he's provided voices for quite a few more games and appears in Left 4 Dead.

He plays quite a few characters in Dota 2.

In fact, at the beginning of the embedded video, it sounds like he's doing a combination of his Pudge and Tusk voices.

I half expected him to make some quip along the lines of, "Homophobia has fallen to the Dire!" or some such thing.

 

[Silvanus]

I just edited that post, so please take a look at it.

Now then...

It becomes part of the thread when I'm told that these conventions are needed because of non-video game related issues and how its now the responsibility of video games to create "safe places". The idea that video games should be the answer for issues in places like Uganda is such a bizarre concept, that it begs the question, "why exactly should video games of all things be the place to create "safe places" for people who face discrimination in places like Uganda?". Surely you can understand why it might seem weird to see people claim that video games should be responsible for non-video game related issues, and that giving video games that responsibility for "safe places" comes off as confusing to some of us?

Nobody mentioned Uganda here, though.

When people talk about "safe places", they simply mean areas (such as conventions) where people who often face disproportionate negative attention can congregate without having to go through that. They may be related to common interests, etc. I don't see why they shouldn't exist around video-games, if the interest is there, which it clearly is.

It's not that video games are being made "responsible for non-video game related issues". It's simply a convention for people who may face negative attention elsewhere.

I'm glad you know misrepresentation wasn't my intention. I'm genuinely just asking if we can just keep this thread focused on the positive news of the OP.