On Gaymers and Cons

[Guestyman]

Speaking without rancor, I don't think it's a particularly great idea you can insist all you like that the convention is open to everyone but it's still not going to change the fact that most straight people attending would feel just a little bit uncomfortable as the very name implies it's not intended for us. (Maybe that's the point, who knows?)

I think it would have been much more constructive if instead they didn't give it a specific focus on gay culture in gaming and instead simply made it part of their mission brief to be inclusive to all gamers with the promise of removing anyone who showed intolerance towards another part of our culture.

Maybe I've just lucked out here and I just happen to frequent some of the most down-to-earth and unprejudiced gaming hangouts about but I really do think our culture is one of the most inclusive and forward thinking ones around.

The point isn't to make straight people feel uncomfortable, it's just not being the target audience has that effect. The need for such a con is because, your corner of the 'verse apparently aside, the wider gaming community can be quite shockingly homophobic, sexist and exclusionary at times. I'm really glad that situations exist where people can get the opinion of our culture as being forward thinking and inclusive, but the sad fact of the matter is that it is not the case.

Gaming culture is largely reactionary rather than forward thinking. Maybe it's because of our until-recent isolation and underdog status within the wider culture, or maybe not. I don't fancy doing armchair psychology. The fact is though that wider gaming culture is very defensive and monolithic. It's also not very inclusive at all. 5 minutes on voice chat in an online shooter will show you that. I've been called fag more times whilst online gaming than I was after being outed as bi in an all boys church high school.

I'll give you an example. Every year my home city has a festival of queer artistic culture. (Not that my city is particularly inclusive or anything, we have festivals for everything from guitars, to busking, to v8 supercars. We're a very festival-happy city) one of the big highlights of the community aspect of the festival is a big picnic in the town square. Nothing particularly 'queer' about it except that it's set up with the express purpose of being queer-friendly. Straight people are welcome to come along, but they're not the target audience.

You might ask "Why have a gay picnic? What would you do differently at a gay picnic than a regular picnic?" in the same way as you'd ask "Why have a Gaymercon? What would you do differently at a Gaymercon than a regular Gamercon" but you'd be missing the point. It's not about having a con or a picnic with a 'gay theme'.

I went to the picnic for the first time this year, and I had a great time sitting and eating with some friends of mine I didn't get to see very often. The striking thing about the picnic was that we didn't *do* anything different to a regular picnic. The only thing that was different was that as opposed to any other picnic was that here everyone knew or assumed I was queer and /no-one gave a rats/. There I was *normal*, and I don't get to feel that way very often.

So why have a gaymercon? It's not to focus on games with a queer theme, or to provide queer gamers with a place to 'hook up' (I'm not even going to begin to discuss people constantly making that assumption except to say it is a perfect illustration of why we need a con in the first place). It's to provide us a place where everyone either knows or assumes and nobody cares. A place where we can celebrate the gaming subculture whilst feeling normal when we don't get that very often.

It might seem small to you, but you get that everywhere you go, whereas in my experience gaming culture is largely a place where no-one knows or assumes and once they find out *everyone* cares, and you rarely, if ever, get to feel normal.

Case in point. This thread has over 260 replies. The one where Jonathan took a swipe at religion (At Christmas no less) only managed 74.

 

[Abomination]

The question being asked is still - why is this required?

And here is the answer: it isn't required. I have seen no mandate requiring it. This fulfills no needs.

Asking why it's required or needed misses the point of wants. IE: This is something some people want to do.

If it isn't required, if it isn't fulfilling some purpose then WHY is it happening at all?

There -must- be a reason and I'm trying to get to the bottom of it.

 

[The Wooster]

Ok this thread got out of hand fast, it is getting challenging to keep up.

That must be the understatement of, admittedly, this very early year. XD

Ok, everyone, important question time:

Is this Con banning non-gay people from attending? (Answer: NO)


If the gay culture is not your thing, then give the convention a pass. All these complaints almost feel like people are afraid that having too many conventions will somehow deplete the non-renewable convention resource! (Hint: it won't, you can have a theoretical infinite number of conventions with infinite themes, given enough geek critical mass)

Discussing whether there is a need for this convention or not is exactly the same thing detractors of videogames or comics argue regarding those conventions. Just because you don't get it, it doesn't mean it's worthless.

Gay Culture lol? Isn't the whole idea that lesbians and gays want to be seen as no different than any straight person? I didn't know that sexual orientations had a whole culture reserved for themselves...

No, they want to be "treated" the same way. Integration is about different people living in harmony, not reducing every culture to a homogenous soup. I mean think about what you just said there. Would you suggest the same thing about a Chinese person? That their culture somehow prevents them from being seen as "the same" as everyone else.

 

[Irridium]

So, I'm confused. Damn-near all cons are made to appeal to straight white males. Gaymer X is just like them, but instead is made to appeal to not straight white males. Straight white males are more than welcome to attend, but the focus simply isn't on them.

Why is this such a big issue? Nobody is excluding anyone, nobody's going to make anyone feel unwelcome, nothing is being taken away from anyone, it's just another video-game convention but just not aimed at straight white males.

Again, why is that an issue?

 

[Darken12]

So, I'm confused. Damn-near all cons are made to appeal to straight, white, males. Gaymer X is just like them, but instead is made to appeal to not straight, white, males. Straight white males are more than welcome to attend, but the focus simply isn't on them.

Why is this such a big issue? Nobody is excluding anyone, nobody's going to make anyone feel unwelcome, nothing is being taken away from anyone, it's just another video-game convention but just not aimed at straight white males.

Again, why is that an issue?

Straight privilege.

EDIT: As I said before, the problem with straight privilege is that straight people perceive being catered to as the status quo, so any perturbation of this is seen as a threat. Wanting a safe area for LGBT people to feel safe and comfortable (emphasis on safety!) is seen as an insult because we're not bending over to make sure they feel catered to.

TL;DR: Straight Privilege.

 

[Zen Toombs]

This. Another thing I thought about was that are there even enough "gaymers" that 1) particularly want this sort of thing and 2) live densely enough to make this a big event? I don't imagine one would be willing to drive 500 miles just to get to a gaming convention specifically aimed at their sexuality. Unless gaming conventions are REALLY homphobic events, I really don't see much point in this.

with all due respect, 1) that's actually part of the point of this, 'cause gay gamers totally exist. and 2) for Magic pre-release events, people used to drive a lot farther than that. So there's definitely precedence. Also, I'd be interested in going that far or further to some of the cons I've been interested in.

Also, as people are straight, and many don't notice the subtle privileges that straight people have [http://btgproject.blogspot.com/2012/01/confronting-straight-privilege.html]. Most conventions aren't TOO homophobic but it's still really nice to be able to not have to worry about such things at all, even if only for a short time.

Spoiler: some examples of straight privilege for those who don't like links

? I can be pretty sure that the people I encounter will be comfortable with my sexual orientation
? If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented.
? When I talk about my heterosexuality, such as in a joke or talking about my relationship, I will not be accused of pushing my sexual orientation onto others.
? I do not have to fear that if my family or friends find out about my sexual orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical or psychological consequences.
? I did not grow up with games that attack my sexual orientation (eg. fag tag or smear the queer)
? I am not accused of being abused, warped or psychologically confused because of my sexual orientation.
? I can go home from most meetings, classes and conversations without feeling excluded, fearful, attacked, isolated, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, stereotyped or feared because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t be asked to speak for everyone who is heterosexual.
? People won?t ask why I made my choice of sexual orientation.
? People won?t ask why I made my choice to be public about my sexual orientation.
? I won?t have to fear revealing my sexual orientation to friends or family. It?s assumed.
? People won?t try to convince me to change my sexual orientation.
? I won?t have to defend my heterosexuality.
? I can easily find a faith community that will not exclude me for being a heterosexual in a relationship.
? I won?t need to worry that people will harass me because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t need to qualify my straight identity.
? My masculinity or femininity won?t be challenged because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t be primarily or solely identified by my sexual orientation.
? If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has sexual orientation overtones.
? I am guaranteed to find people of my sexual orientation represented in my workplace.
? I can walk in public with my significant other and not have people do a double-take or stare.
? I can remain oblivious of the language and culture of sexual minority persons without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.
? I can go for months without being called straight.
? People do not assume I am experienced in sex (or that I even have it) merely because of my sexual orientation.
? Nobody calls me straight with maliciousness.
? People can use terms that describe my sexual orientation and mean positive things (eg. straight as an arrow, standing up straight, or straightened out) instead of demeaning terms (eg.ewww that?s gay, or stop being so queer)
? I am not asked to think about why I am straight.
? I can be open about my sexual orientation and not worry about my job, access to housing, treatment at a bed & breakfast, or response in health crises.

How does sexuality affect behavior at a gaming convention?

Well, your sexuality doesn't really affect behavior, but the sexuality of others does. For one, straight guys can get very uncomfortable if a guy says that a male character is attractive. Also, just like in most things, gays are a minority and so it is difficult for them to easily be around other gays, and those they do know are not guaranteed to share their interests.

 

[Zen Toombs]

So, I'm confused. Damn-near all cons are made to appeal to straight, white, males. Gaymer X is just like them, but instead is made to appeal to not straight, white, males. Straight white males are more than welcome to attend, but the focus simply isn't on them.

Why is this such a big issue? Nobody is excluding anyone, nobody's going to make anyone feel unwelcome, nothing is being taken away from anyone, it's just another video-game convention but just not aimed at straight white males.

Again, why is that an issue?

Straight privilege.

I laughed and laughed and laughed. You'll probably want to add a touch more to your post so you don't get dinged for low content. See you 'round the forum!

 

[General Twinkletoes]

So, I'm confused. Damn-near all cons are made to appeal to straight white males. Gaymer X is just like them, but instead is made to appeal to not straight white males. Straight white males are more than welcome to attend, but the focus simply isn't on them.

Why is this such a big issue? Nobody is excluding anyone, nobody's going to make anyone feel unwelcome, nothing is being taken away from anyone, it's just another video-game convention but just not aimed at straight white males.

Again, why is that an issue?

Because apparently it's "heterophobia" or excluding straight people.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

...Wait.

They seriously have Normie-MLP cons?

Really?

Well, I believe so. They've been over-shadowed by the whole brony thing, but MLP collectors have been around for a long time. Similar to Beanie Babies.

Plus, y'know, MLP probably had a large presence at toy conventions even before the brony thing.

Oh that doesn't count. That's a toy thing, not a MLP thing.

This. Another thing I thought about was that are there even enough "gaymers" that 1) particularly want this sort of thing and 2) live densely enough to make this a big event? I don't imagine one would be willing to drive 500 miles just to get to a gaming convention specifically aimed at their sexuality. Unless gaming conventions are REALLY homphobic events, I really don't see much point in this.

with all due respect, 1) that's actually part of the point of this, 'cause gay gamers totally exist. and 2) for Magic pre-release events, people used to drive a lot farther than that. So there's definitely precedence. Also, I'd be interested in going that far or further to some of the cons I've been interested in.

Also, as people are straight, and many don't notice the subtle privileges that straight people have [http://btgproject.blogspot.com/2012/01/confronting-straight-privilege.html]. Most conventions aren't TOO homophobic but it's still really nice to be able to not have to worry about such things at all, even if only for a short time.

Spoiler: some examples of straight privilege for those who don't like links

? I can be pretty sure that the people I encounter will be comfortable with my sexual orientation
? If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented.
? When I talk about my heterosexuality, such as in a joke or talking about my relationship, I will not be accused of pushing my sexual orientation onto others.
? I do not have to fear that if my family or friends find out about my sexual orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical or psychological consequences.
? I did not grow up with games that attack my sexual orientation (eg. fag tag or smear the queer)
? I am not accused of being abused, warped or psychologically confused because of my sexual orientation.
? I can go home from most meetings, classes and conversations without feeling excluded, fearful, attacked, isolated, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, stereotyped or feared because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t be asked to speak for everyone who is heterosexual.
? People won?t ask why I made my choice of sexual orientation.
? People won?t ask why I made my choice to be public about my sexual orientation.
? I won?t have to fear revealing my sexual orientation to friends or family. It?s assumed.
? People won?t try to convince me to change my sexual orientation.
? I won?t have to defend my heterosexuality.
? I can easily find a faith community that will not exclude me for being a heterosexual in a relationship.
? I won?t need to worry that people will harass me because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t need to qualify my straight identity.
? My masculinity or femininity won?t be challenged because of my sexual orientation.
? I won?t be primarily or solely identified by my sexual orientation.
? If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has sexual orientation overtones.
? I am guaranteed to find people of my sexual orientation represented in my workplace.
? I can walk in public with my significant other and not have people do a double-take or stare.
? I can remain oblivious of the language and culture of sexual minority persons without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.
? I can go for months without being called straight.
? People do not assume I am experienced in sex (or that I even have it) merely because of my sexual orientation.
? Nobody calls me straight with maliciousness.
? People can use terms that describe my sexual orientation and mean positive things (eg. straight as an arrow, standing up straight, or straightened out) instead of demeaning terms (eg.ewww that?s gay, or stop being so queer)
? I am not asked to think about why I am straight.
? I can be open about my sexual orientation and not worry about my job, access to housing, treatment at a bed & breakfast, or response in health crises.

How does sexuality affect behavior at a gaming convention?

Well, your sexuality doesn't really affect behavior, but the sexuality of others does. For one, straight guys can get very uncomfortable if a guy says that a male character is attractive. Also, just like in most things, gays are a minority and so it is difficult for them to easily be around other gays, and those they do know are not guaranteed to share their interests.

Ya know... *sigh*

That privilege stuff is really just a broad generalization. One that was enough to make me feel alienated enough that I didn't want to join/help/endorse the GSA in high school. Doesn't just go for the gay thing either, goes for a lot of things.

Everybody has problems. No one is born with acceptance on their back. Everyone feels alienated. Rich, poor, black, asian, whatever.

It's just one of those "Oh you think you got it hard?" blech. Doesn't bring people together, just drives them to be further segregated. Us vs Them. They couldn't possibly understand us and our problems, that line of thinking.

 

[Darken12]

I laughed and laughed and laughed. You'll probably want to add a touch more to your post so you don't get dinged for low content. See you 'round the forum!

Thanks, I think you delivered the point far better than I did.

Ya know... *sigh*

That privilege stuff is really just a broad generalization. One that was enough to make me feel alienated enough that I didn't want to join/help/endorse the GSA in high school. Doesn't just go for the gay thing either, goes for a lot of things.

Everybody has problems. No one is born with acceptance on their back. Everyone feels alienated. Rich, poor, black, asian, whatever.

It's just one of those "Oh you think you got it hard?" blech. Doesn't bring people together, just drives them to be further segregated. Us vs Them. They couldn't possibly understand us and our problems, that line of thinking.

Feminism has a great concept called "the kyriarchy" (from the Greek word kyrios, meaning Lord or Master), which is a way to analyse our current society as a system of interlocking oppression. In it, one integrates racism, sexism, homophobia, classism and all the other -isms and -phobias as a network-like pyramid of oppression. What you're saying amounts to "the kyriarchy is okay because most of us are oppressed one way or another". And that's just tragic, really, because it's the best way to keep us all feeling feeling awful and keeping our society from improving.

Just because most of us are victims of the kyriarchy in one way or another doesn't mean that we should put each other down. It means we should help each other instead.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

I laughed and laughed and laughed. You'll probably want to add a touch more to your post so you don't get dinged for low content. See you 'round the forum!

Thanks, I think you delivered the point far better than I did.

Ya know... *sigh*

That privilege stuff is really just a broad generalization. One that was enough to make me feel alienated enough that I didn't want to join/help/endorse the GSA in high school. Doesn't just go for the gay thing either, goes for a lot of things.

Everybody has problems. No one is born with acceptance on their back. Everyone feels alienated. Rich, poor, black, asian, whatever.

It's just one of those "Oh you think you got it hard?" blech. Doesn't bring people together, just drives them to be further segregated. Us vs Them. They couldn't possibly understand us and our problems, that line of thinking.

Feminism has a great concept called "the kyriarchy" (from the Greek word kyrios, meaning Lord or Master), which is a way to analyse our current society as a system of interlocking oppression. In it, one integrates racism, sexism, homophobia, classism and all the other -isms and -phobias as a network-like pyramid of oppression. What you're saying amounts to "the kyriarchy is okay because most of us are oppressed one way or another". And that's just tragic, really, because it's the best way to keep us all feeling feeling awful and keeping our society from improving.

Just because most of us are victims of the kyriarchy in one way or another doesn't mean that we should put each other down. It means we should help each other instead.

Um, no not what I said at all. I didn't say it was okay at all. <.<

 

[Orekoya]

The question being asked is still - why is this required?

And here is the answer: it isn't required. I have seen no mandate requiring it. This fulfills no needs.

Asking why it's required or needed misses the point of wants. IE: This is something some people want to do.

If it isn't required, if it isn't fulfilling some purpose then WHY is it happening at all?

There -must- be a reason and I'm trying to get to the bottom of it.

I hate to break it to you but there doesn't have to be any underlying reason or purpose for it. Some people just want this and apparently they find whatever exists now insufficient at fulfilling that want.

 

[Darken12]

Um, no not what I said at all. I didn't say it was okay at all. <.<

Your problem with the discussion of privilege and your assertion that "everyone feels alienated" seemed to indicate that you did. My apologies if I misconstrued your intent.

 

[FireDr@gon]

Thing is, you don't get to decide how another person is supposed to interpret the words you use. If you say 'fa*' in front of a gay person and they feel upset about it, "I didn't mean 'gay'" is not a very good excuse.

I absolutely appreciate that you don't use it in front of strangers, but it's not hard to imagine that plenty of people will and have, even if they didn't mean 'gay'. To me, I find it pretty odd that some people think they can just detatch the word from its derogatory meaning with no issue whatsoever, obviously you know how the word has been widely used to put down gay people, so why not just use something else that doesn't have that context around it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s13X66BFd8 - skip to 0:30.

If you're having trouble comprehending how words like 'gay' and 'fag' can be used in the same way as, say, 'shit' and 'crap' without the user even thinking about homosexuality then consider that the word 'gay' used to mean happy or fun.

A words' meaning can change, and in the case of the word 'gay' it's changed twice. Another person made a good point about how british people call cigarrettes fags and we do - if we're feeling lazy. But fag can also mean a gay person in the UK.

I'm a closet bi and for years i've used the word 'gay' as a derogatory term with my friends that know me(but not my sexuality)and my anti-prejudice beliefs. It started off as a kind of 'fit-in' cover as i didn't want to come out and it just stuck and became a regular part of my repetoir. As i have become more accepting of my own sexuality i feel hypocrytical using those words and choose other derogatory terms instead. But i CAN understand how these words can be used without meaning any disrespect to gay people and when i hear them being used as derogatory terms by my friends i remind myself that they are just trying to fit in by parroting tropes, like I once did.

What i've realised is this; the danger of using tropes like 'gay' and 'fag' as derogatory terms is that it re-inforces in a lesbian, gay or bisexual persons' mind that there is something wrong with their sexuality. This happens regardless of intent or the viewpoints of the 'offender' because an assosiation forms in peoples' subconsious: If bad things = gay gay must = bad I'm/they're gay, I/they must be bad.

Even if the person using the word has nothing against gay people it can still do harm, so expand your vocaubulary and choose/invent a different word in the spirit of being the accepting, progressive people that you are.

Just in case anyone gives a monkey's; I'm a closet bi because I don't like the thought of defining myself by my sexuality and don't feel the need to 'confess' it to everyone; even to my closest friends. I only brought up my sexuality here because it's relevant to my arguments.


On topic I can understand why there is this devide - accepting people don't care about sexuality & on the assumption that everyone is as accepting as them they don't see why a gay person would need a gay-friendly convention.

Gay people know not everyone is accepting and want somewhere where they can appreciate their love of video games without fear of hate. Kind of how I and others enjoy the anonymity that the internet provides which allows someone to mention their sexuality without fear of reprisal. Sometimes being gay can be like wearing a mask that itches from time-to-time. To a gay person, A gay-friendly con is like a 'casual-clothes-friday' at work; where we do what we always do, but feel a bit more comfortable doing it.

My veiw on the issue is; it will all sort itself out eventually - things usually do.

 

[Zyntoxic]

I understand the need, in fact I've been tempted by going to Girl gamer events, but then there is always this little thought nagging at me in my head.

this is my point of view, not saying that these conventions are, bad, they fill a crucial need.

I'm a regular goer to gaming conventions, go with a few friends bring our gaming gear and just be gamers for a few days and meet other gamers, it's a lot of fun.
but it so painfully obvious that I'm not the one being the target audience, like at all, and straight male interests are being put well above my interests.

this is because of the persistent idea that gaming is a male hobby.
there is no lack of women on conventions anymore but as I said the idea persists.

and then comes the thought that maybe a convention focused on my kind of audience would be nice, which is probably true, but in my mind it is lazy and self defeating.

normal "cons" are mainly directed towards straight white men, but it's not called straight-white-male-gamer-con, so why should it be "straight-white-male-gamer-con"? mainly it is because "stright-white-male" is the norm and by definition normal, but the rest of us should considered be normal as well.
What I want is not to make a special con for "the specials" but the specials should demand more space on the normal con.

and this is a work in progress, but we are far from there yet.
so for me, having "special-cons" makes it valid to also not consider us the norm.
"why should we give you space? you already have your own convention for that"

as I said, I understand the purpose, but it is just not for me.



PS. for people saying sexuality has nothing to do with conventions: seriously? have you even been at a convention? or the internet the past few months? I have these two words for you: booth babes, those usually aren't either gay or male, only there for the pleasure of the straight man.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Um, no not what I said at all. I didn't say it was okay at all. <.<

Your problem with the discussion of privilege and your assertion that "everyone feels alienated" seemed to indicate that you did. My apologies if I misconstrued your intent.

Actually if anything, you kinda pointed it out.

We can attack oppression on the big picture. Not the little picture. Big picture inclusive, little picture exclusive.

 

[Guestyman]

I laughed and laughed and laughed. You'll probably want to add a touch more to your post so you don't get dinged for low content. See you 'round the forum!

Thanks, I think you delivered the point far better than I did.

Ya know... *sigh*

That privilege stuff is really just a broad generalization. One that was enough to make me feel alienated enough that I didn't want to join/help/endorse the GSA in high school. Doesn't just go for the gay thing either, goes for a lot of things.

Everybody has problems. No one is born with acceptance on their back. Everyone feels alienated. Rich, poor, black, asian, whatever.

It's just one of those "Oh you think you got it hard?" blech. Doesn't bring people together, just drives them to be further segregated. Us vs Them. They couldn't possibly understand us and our problems, that line of thinking.

Feminism has a great concept called "the kyriarchy" (from the Greek word kyrios, meaning Lord or Master), which is a way to analyse our current society as a system of interlocking oppression. In it, one integrates racism, sexism, homophobia, classism and all the other -isms and -phobias as a network-like pyramid of oppression. What you're saying amounts to "the kyriarchy is okay because most of us are oppressed one way or another". And that's just tragic, really, because it's the best way to keep us all feeling feeling awful and keeping our society from improving.

Just because most of us are victims of the kyriarchy in one way or another doesn't mean that we should put each other down. It means we should help each other instead.

Um, no not what I said at all. I didn't say it was okay at all. <.<

You did however (by dismissing discussion of Straight privilege and queer safe spaces within the gaming community as exclusionary "Us vs. them" "Driving segregation" stuff) basically say is that because everyone has problems if you try to fix any problems without trying to fix all problems you're being unfair.

The existence of Gaymercon doesn't preclude anyone from starting a collective for poor gamers where they can trade and lend their used games and discuss being a gamer whilst being poor. It doesn't preclude a black gamer con or an asian gamer con. Queer gamers identified a problem within wider Gaming subculture: namely that many queer gamers *Do Not Feel Safe* in the wider gaming subculture. They proposed a solution: The creation of a specific safe space for themselves. There shouldn't be a controversy over this.

I, and I feel confident in representing a vast majority of the queer gaming community with this, long for a time where queerness is normalised to the point where the notion of a specific 'queer' gaming convention seems quaint and obsolete. We're not separatists. The point remains though that *we're not there yet*. Sure we'll push for greater acceptance within wider gaming culture, but until we get there, for goodness sake let us have our sandbox. It's not hurting anyone.

 

[Doclector]

It took me at least three looks to notice that the guy in the last panel isn't wearing any pants.

Honestly, I've asked the "why do they want their own con" question myself. Mostly because I don't know what one would do at a gay con that one wouldn't do at a regular con.

Then again, I've never actually been to a con. If the point is to fit in... then fair enough I guess.

Pretty much this. Except, due to not really hearing about it, I hadn't asked this question beforehand, and I had it answered by the end of the article.

It's an easy enough mistake to make, I guess. It's the point at which someone sticks to that view after having things explained that makes it willingly ignorant, I'd say.

Still, good comic. Gotta admit though...I'm pretty sure there's a brand of premium cider called "Gaymers". And now I want cider. Dammit.

 

[Ickorus]

Speaking without rancor, I don't think it's a particularly great idea you can insist all you like that the convention is open to everyone but it's still not going to change the fact that most straight people attending would feel just a little bit uncomfortable as the very name implies it's not intended for us. (Maybe that's the point, who knows?)

I think it would have been much more constructive if instead they didn't give it a specific focus on gay culture in gaming and instead simply made it part of their mission brief to be inclusive to all gamers with the promise of removing anyone who showed intolerance towards another part of our culture.

Maybe I've just lucked out here and I just happen to frequent some of the most down-to-earth and unprejudiced gaming hangouts about but I really do think our culture is one of the most inclusive and forward thinking ones around.

The point isn't to make straight people feel uncomfortable, it's just not being the target audience has that effect. The need for such a con is because, your corner of the 'verse apparently aside, the wider gaming community can be quite shockingly homophobic, sexist and exclusionary at times. I'm really glad that situations exist where people can get the opinion of our culture as being forward thinking and inclusive, but the sad fact of the matter is that it is not the case.

Gaming culture is largely reactionary rather than forward thinking. Maybe it's because of our until-recent isolation and underdog status within the wider culture, or maybe not. I don't fancy doing armchair psychology. The fact is though that wider gaming culture is very defensive and monolithic. It's also not very inclusive at all. 5 minutes on voice chat in an online shooter will show you that. I've been called fag more times whilst online gaming than I was after being outed as bi in an all boys church high school.

I'll give you an example. Every year my home city has a festival of queer artistic culture. (Not that my city is particularly inclusive or anything, we have festivals for everything from guitars, to busking, to v8 supercars. We're a very festival-happy city) one of the big highlights of the community aspect of the festival is a big picnic in the town square. Nothing particularly 'queer' about it except that it's set up with the express purpose of being queer-friendly. Straight people are welcome to come along, but they're not the target audience.

You might ask "Why have a gay picnic? What would you do differently at a gay picnic than a regular picnic?" in the same way as you'd ask "Why have a Gaymercon? What would you do differently at a Gaymercon than a regular Gamercon" but you'd be missing the point. It's not about having a con or a picnic with a 'gay theme'.

I went to the picnic for the first time this year, and I had a great time sitting and eating with some friends of mine I didn't get to see very often. The striking thing about the picnic was that we didn't *do* anything different to a regular picnic. The only thing that was different was that as opposed to any other picnic was that here everyone knew or assumed I was queer and /no-one gave a rats/. There I was *normal*, and I don't get to feel that way very often.

So why have a gaymercon? It's not to focus on games with a queer theme, or to provide queer gamers with a place to 'hook up' (I'm not even going to begin to discuss people constantly making that assumption except to say it is a perfect illustration of why we need a con in the first place). It's to provide us a place where everyone either knows or assumes and nobody cares. A place where we can celebrate the gaming subculture whilst feeling normal when we don't get that very often.

It might seem small to you, but you get that everywhere you go, whereas in my experience gaming culture is largely a place where no-one knows or assumes and once they find out *everyone* cares, and you rarely, if ever, get to feel normal.

Case in point. This thread has over 260 replies. The one where Jonathan took a swipe at religion (At Christmas no less) only managed 74.

I'm really glad you posted, you've helped me understand so much, I hope one day none of this will be necessary but I can see why it is at the moment now.

Thank you.

 

[Darken12]

Actually if anything, you kinda pointed it out.

We can attack oppression on the big picture. Not the little picture. Big picture inclusive, little picture exclusive.

I'm sorry, I do not understand what you're saying at all. By 'big picture' you mean politics, laws, things that involve a senate or a court? If so, allow me laugh out loud as I link you a map of gay rights by state in the US [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2012/may/08/gay-rights-united-states]. They don't come even close to tackling oppression or equal rights in the big picture.

And even if we did live in some utopia of equal rights, that doesn't mean that you don't face perfectly legal oppression every time you walk down the street. I don't know about you, but it doesn't strike me as insane to want a place where LGBT people can do all the things they do at a normal con without having to deal with stares, ostracism, rude language, snide remarks, straight privilege, ignorant remarks and all other kinds of perfectly legal but still incredibly uncomfortable bad attitudes.