Jimquisition: Creative Freedom, Strings Attached

Recommended Videos

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
Hades said:
You sound a bit weird today Jim. Still suffering from Pax Flu?
I recorded this on Friday when I was possibly at my worst. I almost didn't record as I was choking on my own filth while trying to talk. Sorry it was so noticeable in the final recording, I did my best, and Friday was basically my deadline.
Actually Jim, I didn't notice the "Con Flu" sound in your voice in this video, compared to how you sounded in last week's Rhymedown video. You sound like you're getting better already.
OT: This video has one of the best arguments in gender relations I've heard in a long time. Creators make their products as how they designed them, and criticism of them only works when the creators do something dumb. The problems occur when it gets arbitrary, like bringing up the lack of female PC's when the games' creators just didn't think to put them in. You could make your character in the Saint's Row games female, right?
 

Goliath100

New member
Sep 29, 2009
437
0
0
uanime5 said:
Goliath100 said:
Sounds like someone's upset because people consider Gordon Freeman to be a man because he's a man. Also the player cannot turn Freeman into a woman, as the player's psyche has no effect on a person's gender.
You don't think "gender" is psychological?
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,580
0
0
uanime5 said:
Being intersex doesn't make you a third gender. Their genitals may not indicate whether they're male or female but their brains do. This has been confirmed by scientific studies on children with malformed genitals which showed that boys and girls with both sets of genitals responded the same ways as boys and girls with normal genitals. There have never been any cases of children acting like a third gender.
Oooooh, I get it, this isn't about intersexuals or hermaphrodites. This is about transgenderism. Well, I can assure you that exists too, known as gender dysphoria [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_dysphoria] or gender identity disorder to psychologists. A very real condition in which a person feels dysphoria and discontentment with the sex they were assigned at birth, and/or the gender roles which come with that sex. And this can be observed at a very early age, [http://nypost.com/2013/06/24/transgender-6-year-old-wins-civil-rights-case-to-use-girls-bathroom-at-school/] just as homosexuality can often be observed at a very early age (if the parents are paying attention and are open to the idea).

Care to explain why toddlers exhibit these same preferences despite not being told what they like? What about babies and chimps which show the exact same preferences with anyone every telling them what they're meant to like? This isn't due to the media, it's due to the way that humans have evolved (which is why men and women have different types of brains).

The only thing that needs to be examined is why some people seem to believe that the mass media is able to "brainwash" children into liking dolls or trucks when the mass media isn't able to make them eat vegetables or not take drugs.
Of course they're being told what they like, all the time. Just turn on a movie or kid's TV show. The little girls like little dolls, and the boys like boy toys. And just watch the commercials to see this even further solidified--the girls are always playing with dollhouses and kitchen sets, and the boys are always building stuff and driving cars and saving the world.

Also, I'm not so sure if you want to bring animals into this discussion, because then that allows me to bring up lions which sort of deflates your whole "females never hunt and gather" thing. It's really low-hanging fruit, and rather irrelevant because if we're going to start comparing our behaviors to chimps, then please tell me why we aren't having as much sex as bonobos. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo#Sexual_social_behavior] Which, yes, are a type of chimpanzee.

Notice how the historians are unsure whether these tribes had matriarchies because there's very little evidence as to how they were ruled. In fact almost all of the descriptions of these matriarchies come from people who didn't belong to these cultures. It would be interesting to see if these cultures actually considered themselves to be matriarchies.

Another thing I noticed is that none of these matriarchies seems to have had a written language or bronze age technology so it could be claimed that matriarchies are an ineffective form of government.
There seems to be little dispute about the Hopi tribe, which still exists today (there's a user here on the Escapist who is Hopi I can refer you to if you want to talk about that, it's pretty neat really), as well as the Iroquois Confederacy.

And if you really think "government" has anything to do with how quickly a culture develops writing then you really are in the dark here. To put it in perspective, Japan didn't have writing at the time either. Their writing system came over from China, but first it had to pass through Korea. And our own writing system came from the Phoenicians who traded with many cultures, and needed a set writing system to be able to keep tabs on things. Necessity is the mother of invention, so if a culture is doing fine without writing then they won't develop it. Because they don't need it, just as we don't waste time developing a set of egg beaters that can mix up all of Lake Superior in less than 90 minutes. We just don't need it.

Research has shown that these traits are common among all cultures, not just mine. For example young men are more likely to commit crimes across all cultures than young women; men are more likely to work in STEM jobs than women; women are more likely to be stay at home mothers even when they can choose to work and the father can raise the children. The fact that you're dismissing these similarities simply because you don't like they just shows how uniformed you are.

Now either name some cultures where the oppose of these traits occurs or admit that you're wrong.
Name the studies which say these, first of all. I've cited many sources, and you can feel free to do the same. I'm well aware there are many inherent traits, but the problem I have with this is even if you cite sources for any of this all you're going to give me is statistics. Statistics are not research, they are numbers. Statistics don't provide cause or give any explanation as to why, they're simply plots on a chart. Yes women are more likely to be stay at home mothers, but that sort of makes sense in a country like the US which provides no paternity leave. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternity_leave] You're just willing to look at statistics and take them at face value. You don't seem to have any intention of thinking about what outside forces can be at play. I'm not saying these outside forces always exist or would always lead me to be correct, but the least you can do is think about them and not take all of this at face value.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who wants to spout their ideological nonsense and ignore what has been scientifically proven is an idiot.
Then I'm afraid you aren't going to last very long here. Because it doesn't matter how much scientific proof you think you've accumulated, if you can't at least pretend this isn't the playground in kindergarten then your childishness is not welcome here.
 

Catrixa

New member
May 21, 2011
209
0
0
Lilani said:
Catrixa said:
Excerpt from what I wrote.
I don't think anybody is asking for GTA V to "represent" women in some way, as much as nobody thinks GTA V in its current state "represents" men in some way. It just seems like a stroke of thoughtlessness. FPS's are filled to the brim with 30-40 something white dudes, so why bother making three different playable characters if you're going to make them ALL 30-40 something white dudes? Variety is the spice of life, after all. I mean, with the way so many shows and such like to shoehorn in the "token woman" or "token black guy" just so they don't get in trouble for forgetting non-white people exist, it almost would have taken some effort for them to make their entire cast white and male.

I have a friend who I've known since middle school. She's a bit shy, but when you get to know her she'll talk your ear off. She fought with clinical depression for a long time, and I've talked her out of suicide more than once. But recently she's gotten on the right medication and found the right therapist, and she's doing great. She's acing her college classes, she's on a first-name basis with the head of her department, she's about to graduate with a bachelor's in psychology and she'll be moving right on to get her master's degree, and she's spending a lot of time volunteering at our local hospital. She's been chosen as volunteer of the month like three times now, and she's on a first-name basis with some of the higher-ups in the hospital.

And there's something else I noticed about her only just recently. She's Mexican. Well, half-Mexican, but her hair and skin color are definitely of hispanic origin. I've known her for like 10 years now and I only recently put a significant amount of thought into it. As a kid I never thought about it, I had to grow into an adult and just happened to be thinking about non-white people I know due to another conversation on these boards. It almost felt like an epiphany, in a way.

So again, nobody's looking for somebody to "represent" women, as much as my friend doesn't "represent" Mexicans to me. We just want some variety. Plus, the whole whitewashing thing is a bit reminiscent of a time not long ago when non-white people were deliberately excluded from media because they weren't white, which still makes many uncomfortable or at least dubious (I know it makes me a bit curious as to why).
Point taken, perhaps my initial example was bad. I was trying to express the situation that arises when people start bringing out the Bechdel test. A better phrase to replace "represents women" is not immediately coming to mind, but... well, I'm not sure where to go from here (really having a tough time describing it). Anyway, the point of my post was not to specifically discuss that exactly, but rather to address people's trepidation of simply discussing how something has the possibility to be non-progressive in the department of equal representation. As I'm sure you've noticed, most people would rather the subject simply disappear, nothing to change, and the status quo to be maintained as though it were the writ of God. I was trying to suggest that jumping to the conclusion that criticizing something is an absolute determination of the quality of the people that consume that something is actually a huge assumption, and possibly indicative of their own uncertainty (or at least unwillingness to analyze their own opinions). The utter defensiveness some people exude actually drives me up the wall sometimes.

I'm sorry for any confusion, I'm actually really awful at getting my point across (I blame the 5-paragraph essay. I cannot write anything concisely if I tried, and I've tried :/). Let me know if this has helped, or if I'm still not making sense.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,580
0
0
Goliath100 said:
1) Gordon Freeman IS a non entity (as a character), how can you feel one way or another?
Because his name is Gordon Freeman, and everyone else in the world addresses him as a male. His presence is recognized by the world, and he has an effect on the world around him. In fact that's sort of the quick summary of the Half-Life series: Shit happens and Gordon Freeman deals with it. That makes him an entity. Just because he doesn't say anything doesn't mean he doesn't have an effect on the world, or that he's "imaginary," as the definition of a non-entity would suggest.

2) This concept has never been presented for you before (I guess), so you have no grounds say that Gordon "male", because the idea of Gordon being female never enterd your mind.
I had no reason to think of him as a female, because the game outright told me he wasn't. Here, in this video, at 2:57.


3)How anyone "feels" about this changes nothing.


4)Actions define characters, player define action of playable character, therefore player defines playable character. In other words: The player is part of character's psyche. Psyche defines one's gender. Therefore, playable character changes after player's gender.
So, how I feel about the character's actions defines how I see the character. Got it.

I think I get what you're saying, but I feel like it's rendered a bit irrelevant by every single other character telling me Gordon is a male. This could probably apply to Minecraft Steve, but Gordon Freeman has an identity that is plainly stated by the game and recognized by the words of every other player he comes in contact with. He isn't a non-entity by definition because he isn't a person of no importance and he isn't imaginary. Unless you're going to go fully abstract on me and say all of the Half-Life world can't exist because it revolves around a person who can't (or won't) speak.
 

Bara_no_Hime

New member
Sep 15, 2010
3,644
0
0
Thanks for another great video, Mr. Jim Sterling. I once again think the gods for you.

OT: I've never heard of the Puppetier before, and it doesn't really sound like my thing, so... yeah, nothing to really say about that.

As to GTA 5 - yup, Rockstar has the right to make the game about whomever they choose. And I have the right to not buy GTA 5. And so I won't.

However, if Rockstar had included a female protagonist - and I'll bet that someone at Rockstar would have been up for writing something like that, if given the chance - then I would be buying GTA 5.

I preordered Saints Row 4, paying full price for it. Even with games I know I'll like, I often wait for a price drop before purchasing them. However, I preordered Saints Row 4 (two days before release) because it not only included freedom over the protagonist but "romantic" options freed from gender constraints. Saints Row 4 said "We welcome everyone, no matter who you are." - and that was enough for me to want to support them by paying full price on day one.

So, to Rockstar games, I'll say this - you can do as you like. But, if you don't have a story to tell about a female character, then I don't have 60 dollars for you. Good day.
 

grumpymooselion

New member
May 5, 2011
66
0
0
Let me submit this:

I am male.

I have no issue with anyone decided to only allow for a male protagonist. This doesn't mean I prefer it. This doesn't mean I want it to be this way. This doesn't mean I run away screaming if a game stars a female. It simply means that I am okay with it, if it is the developer's choice.

I have issue with publishers dictating what the gender of a playable character is, to developers.

I am also a writer.

I have two novels that I'm working on, one nearly finished and the other only a few chapters are completed for. Both of them follow a single character, rather that switching the view between multiple characters. Both characters are female. Not to make a statement. Not to balance things against male protagonists in other books. Nothing like that.

I simply made the decision because the genders were part of the ideas I had. And anyone that wants them to be a different gender, or doesn't like the choice, can go jump off a cliff.

Likewise, if I'd written them with male protagonists, I'd have done it because the gender fit with my ideas. And if anyone wanted them to be a different gender, or didn't like the choice, they could also go jump off a cliff.

I tend to side with the developers. I side with them because publishers trying to force them into a decision, like gender, annoy me. I tend to side with the developers. I side with them because fans/critics ranting and criticizing, even trying to push for or force change, like gender, annoy me. My support is for creative freedom. Not change forced by publish or publisher opinion. My support i just for an artist, expressing themselves. Whatever that expression may be, even if I absolutely dislike what they're expressing, or, how they're expressing it.

-

Now, what do I prefer in games?

I prefer games where you can play both genders, and create your own unique character. I prefer being able to make something of my own, detail a background, and make choices within a story that affect my story. I like it when my character creation options have weight, and I do not, ever, want male and female characters to be the same, or be treated the same, within a story. This is for the simple reason that when I go through a game like this, I go through it multiple times, and I do not want the same experience yet again.

However, those aren't the only games I buy.

Personally, I do not refuse to buy a game based off the gender of the main character. Female protagonist? Sure, if the game is good. Male protagonist? Sure, if the game is good. One race, another race, that race, this race, mixed race, lesbian, gay, bi, straight or transgendered? Sure, if the game is good. Gameplay. Quality of writing. Quality of characters. Visual artistry. Playability. Challenge. There are many things I consider when buying a game.

The gender of a protagonist is not one of them.
 

Bara_no_Hime

New member
Sep 15, 2010
3,644
0
0
Goliath100 said:
4)Actions define characters, player define action of playable character, therefore player defines playable character. In other words: The player is part of character's psyche. Psyche defines one's gender. Therefore, playable character changes after player's gender.
First off, everything that Lilani said goes for me too.

Secondly... if what you're saying were true, then Gordon Freeman isn't a theoretical physicist unless the player is also a theoretical physicist.

My psyche says that I'm an English teacher - does that mean that Black Mesa has started hiring English teachers to work in their physics department?

And yes, I'm being silly now. But it only sounds silly because you are assuming that players always transpose themselves onto the characters they play. Maybe you do that, but I don't - one of the things I like about games is getting to know the characters within the game world, including the protagonist. Even when I have customization and control, the Boss from Saints Row or Commander Shepard aren't me - they're characters in their own right (via their per-recorded dialog) which I have an influence over, but never "become" - even if they do happen to have breasts like I do.
 

BarkBarker

New member
May 30, 2013
466
0
0
Fair and simple, if you don't try to improve your medium with the little things, how the FUCK are we gonna get the big things sorted out. If I was a developer, which I AM studying to be, and my story doesn't have any real difference whether they be a man or a woman, fuck it let them choose, it has no holding on anything I held dear and the story and gameplay is the same regardless, let the industry see more feminine characters put in positive light, then maybe push into better female members of the party, to the main protagonist being a well developed and appreciable female character, if you don't want to improve the industry, go work on fucking mobile phone games, cos I'll be damned if anything on a screen I can fidget and jostle about with in my hands can be immersive, how CAN you when the very act of being able to move the screen reminds me of the physicality of it all?
 

Goliath100

New member
Sep 29, 2009
437
0
0
Lilani said:
Bara_no_Hime said:
1) This only applies to characters when they are playable, but not in cutscene or backstory. This also only applies to gender and nothing more.
2) Just because the game tell you something doesn't make it true. There also the very real possiblety that develepers don't know of this concept.
3) The player is not the character, but PART of the character.
4) Yes, this means that playable characters are constantly changing. To use gendered terms about playable characters are what's wrong.
 

BabySinclair

New member
Apr 15, 2009
934
0
0
uanime5 said:
You're an idiot who has no understanding of human biology. There's no hermaphrodite gender, as a person is either male or female (there's a huge number of scientific studies on children with both genitals which proves that there's no third gender, they children are always male or female).

Gender isn't cultural because gender roles are the same in all cultures. Women prefer roles that are people orientated, while men prefer STEM subjects. If gender could change hourly then you'd have women who had spent 30 years as a nurse suddenly wanting to become an engineer and vice versa.

Clothing, make-up, and hairstyle have nothing to do with gender. A man can wear women's clothing, make-up, and hairstyles but none of these will change his gender in any way.

Finally male and female traits are common in all cultures. That's why there's no human cultures where the women hunt and the men raise children.
For biology, XY, XX, XXY, and XYY do actually cause differences in the development of sexual organs and physical traits, height, muscle development and so on. There is no "hermaphrodite" in the classical sense of both male and female genitalia but having one set and expressing physical traits of the other sex does exist, especially in under-developed countries like rural India and in Africa, where

And yes, what men and women do and are expected to do is determined culturally. Who farms, who raises kids, who conducts trade, who runs the tribe/village/town, how you act, and how you dress is set by your culture. Burial mounds a with female skeletons with battle wounds and skeletal modifications associated with warfare, alongside weapons and a greater wealth of grave goods were uncovered in Pokrovka, Russia, suggesting women not only fought and died in battle, some may have had a greater role in society as leaders and warriors than men.

Saying women prefer people oriented roles while men prefer STEM roles is rather offensive to those that don't, and there's a lot that don't agree with that statement. Around 20% of engineer students in the US are female, and the number's growing. It's also going up in almost every other field of science and mathematics. Culturally, boys and girls are raised differently. What do you get for a young girl? Pink room, flowers, princesses, unicorns, barbie dolls, fake make-up, toy kitchen. Boys get blue, LEGOs, NERF guns, action figures of soldiers/cops, toy cars. It's why the term "tomboy" exists, it's for girls that are seen as acting more like boys than they are like girls. Hell, it's the reason why "fake gamer girl" exists, because the cultural perception is that Males play shooters and "hardcore" games while Females play "casual" games. It's not because girls don't play "hardcore" games, it's because it's seen as a Male trait.

Put on a dress, make-up, lipstick, and high heels and go to work. You don't think people are going to find it weird? Don't think people are going to question you? It's because culturally men don't wear make-up or dresses, women do. You don't see dresses in the Men's aisle. You don't see skirts or blouses. Go to Scotland, bet you can find a skirt with Men's clothing, only difference is that they call it a kilt.

Gender is not binary, and it is not tied directly to what the parts in your pants are. Poorer areas of India recognize three genders, Male, Female, and Hijra. Hijra consists of eunichs, crossdressers and, intersexed persons. They are not seen as being either male nor female, but a third, distinct category Sex and Gender. I recommend you watch Between the Lines: India's Third Gender (2005) or listen to the BBC's The Hijra's of India. The hijra have their own role in society, performing a mix of male and female roles as well as roles unique to their gender. Many Native American tribes in North America had a similar third gender that consisted of biologically male members that either renounced or were stripped of "Maleness" to become what is now referred to as "Two-Spirit". The old term that has fallen out of favor is Berdache. Again, they occupied their own role in their cultures neither Male or Female.

The narrow and dogmatic view on Sex and Gender being not only binary but synonyms is why the LGBT communities in many cultures around the world are facing the hardships they are. If someone is born XY but identifies as a woman, then their gender is Female, regardless of being of the Male sex. They are not a guy in drag, but a woman with different parts. The sooner cultures get back around to accepting that while sex is set, gender is not, then the sooner those cultures can get over their squeamishness.

And please refrain from the insults, all they do is prove that you don't have a solid argument.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,846
0
0
bug_of_war said:
This whole argument is similar to which came first, the chicken or the egg?

In the end, while I still think women have been left out of the spotlight as protagonists and that it's not a bad thing to question why not, I just feel as though it's going to become a redundant question. Sure, there will be the occasional answer of, "Producers made us" but there's gonna be a majority of answers that fall under, "I dunno, just felt right/fitting/reasonable/like what I wanted to do".

Don't force it, don't not do it for the sake of fear either.
I agree completely. And I think there should be less of a focus on attacking games that have a male protagonist and more praising of games that have a female protagonist. If you want female protagonists, how about showing games that have them some support? I heard that Remember Me was pretty good, and I look forward to playing it when I get some breathing room in my backlog, but why is nobody talking about this game? All I ever see is "this game's developers are misogynistic for making the protagonist male" and "that game's developers are misogynistic for making the protagonist male". Honestly, I feel like too many people out there just want to ***** and ***** and ***** and ***** until every game ever released has a female protagonist.

Goliath100 said:
To throw a wrench into this...

It's impossible for a playble character (when playable) to have a gender other than the players. The player is part of the playable character, and the physical absolutes that defines the genders are impossible to measure on virtual character. Than logic follows that what the player identify as defines the gender of the playable character.

Edit: What I'm saying is that if Half-Life 2 is played by someone identifying as female, Gordon Freeman is female in that case. If played by someone idenifying as male, Gordon is male.
Okay.

You're completely and horribly incorrect, but okay.



If you are a girl and play Half Life, the above character is now female because Goliath said so with absolutely nothing to back up his claim. Because why not, right? Fuck logic.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
I'm very torn on this issue. I get that asking questions "why a male protagonist?" is important for a dialogue. But to me its kinda a never ending and very one sided issue. Its ALWAYS 'why a male protagonist and not a woman', its never 'why a woman and not a man?'. Its always on one side. No one has ever asked why is Laura Croft a woman? Couldn't the games still work if she were a he? Why was Specialist Traynor in ME3 a woman and not a man? For that matter, why not an Asari or a squirrel? Why was Aeris a woman and not a dude? Did she NEED to be a woman? And if so, why isn't that sexist if the reverse is?
This is why its a never ending issue to me. The games are made they way they were meant to be. If we as gamers can question each and every choice, then we must. why is conker not a dog, why is Spyro not an oriental dragon, how come Pokemon doesn't reference Michael Jackson enough? And when will Final Fantasy include a bear-to-human other kin that likes Twilight but doesn't like Starbucks? Inclusion, people!
Simple answer: because you didn't make the game.
Should there be more female leads? Sure, go for it! But in fairness, be prepared for other gamers to call you sexist and ask why not a man. That's turn-about and that's fair play.
 

Jennacide

New member
Dec 6, 2007
1,019
0
0
I totally agree with Jim on this. It's always nice to see when we are given an option of male or female protagonists, when it makes sense like most WRPGs, but I also hate it when the community at large feels that companies should be obligated to include them. Forcing a game to cater to your demands isn't helping creativity, and it's not helping support feminism when it's only put in to appease people instead of specifically built for it's inclusion. A good example is Persona 4. Atlus specifically told the fanbase that while P3P could be modified easily to include a female protagonist, too many of the relationships in 4 relied on the protag to be male, and would be too much work to change for Golden. They also smartly took the feedback and offered that they will try to make Persona 5 support both protagonists from the start.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,580
0
0
Goliath100 said:
1) This only applies to characters when they are playable, but not in cutscene or backstory. This also only applies to gender and nothing more.
2) Just because the game tell you something doesn't make it true. There also the very real possiblety that develepers don't know of this concept.
3) The player is not the character, but PART of the character.
4) Yes, this means that playable characters are constantly changing. To use gendered terms about playable characters are what's wrong.
1. HL and HL2 are always playable. Whenever the characters are speaking, you're always able to move, or even walk away if you choose. And at the same time while things are playable, you are being addressed as a male. Tell me, have you ever played these games before?
2. Whether or not they knew of the concept, it clearly wasn't their intention the moment they made an effort to say "This is you, you are male."
3. I'm not seeing where I ever disputed this.
4. I don't get why using gendered terms is wrong when the character has been given a gender.

You're being unnecessarily obtuse. Gordon Freeman's gender is completely uncontested, canonically. There is much we don't know about him and how the HL universe works, but his status as a human male theoretical physicist is one of the things we are presented as absolute, literal fact. If you're going to be this way, then I'm going to start arguing that Doctor Breen is actually a very humanoid mongoose.
 

TheMadDoctorsCat

New member
Apr 2, 2008
1,163
0
0
Akytalusia said:
if only more people understood that concept that freedom of expression doesn't mean freedom from criticism. it would alleviate a lot of frustration worldwide.
Am I being thick here? Where exactly did Gavin Moore say anything to suggest that he DOESN'T understand this concept?

- He said that it was his choice. Which is fine.
- He said that he didn't want to pander to public opinion. Which is fine.
- He said that if somebody didn't like his creation, they were free to not buy / play the game. Which is also fine.

Conspicuously absent here is any mention of freedom of speech or anybody else's right (or lack thereof) to criticise his choices.

Jim, I always enjoy your videos and I usually respect your arguments even if I don't agree with them. But this seems like a strawman. You're putting words into Moore's mouth that, as far as I can see, he never said or intended.
 

Merklyn236

New member
Jun 21, 2013
52
0
0
This is why we should thank God for you Jim. You spelled it all out. Create what you want, but realize you still may have to defend it - and that people can 'vote' for or against you with their wallets.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,580
0
0
Goliath100 said:
Lilani said:
How do you feel about trans people? (just answer, there is a point here)
I am perfectly fine with trans people. I know transgenderism exists, I believe they should live and use whatever facilities they choose to.

What I have no idea about is what this has to do with Gordon Freeman. Are you saying even though it says his gender is male that means his gender identity is up in the air as well? His gender is defined. He's called a male, he appears to be a male, and it appears he's done nothing to correct those around him or make them think otherwise. What else are you looking for to accept that Gordon Freeman is a male?

Now I have two questions for you, and answer them separately. Do you think that Link is a male, and do you think that Harry Potter is a male, and say why for each.