On Gaymers and Cons

[Darken12]

"Straightmers" already exist. They're called gamers. That's why we have "girl gamers" too, because the default is the straight white male.

I think it is an important distinction to make that homosexuals and heterosexuals do not play video games, people do. That is to say that they are people first, everything else at least should come secondary. It is true that the majority of these people consequently happen to be heterosexual males. Currently this majority is being blatantly targeted in various ways in the industry and society in general, but a person's sexuality doesn't have to have anything to do with the medium or their way of living nor should it. It shouldn't be a defining factor, a simple piece of information that is consciously taken into account and misused.

I just don't see how further seperating people who for example happen to play video games into various sub-groups helps create equality in the long-term. A sense of recognition perhaps, but not of equality or unity.

I explain that here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.397621-On-Gaymers-and-Cons?page=10#16243804]. The short version is "I call myself differently because that word doesn't apply to me." Women, LGBT people and people of colour are never going to get what they want (entertainment aimed at them) if they continue to be quiet while the entertainment industry pretends they don't exist. Quietly accepting the gamer label means quietly accepting the tacit implication that you're assumed to be a straight white male by the industry. That is not going to get you anywhere.

Do you not see the exclusion you're promoting, though? You're taking the perception that gays aren't welcome at regular cons, and basically saying "well, since we're not welcome there, you're not welcome in this discussion." It doesn't really come across as inclusive to me. It's not even really a debate, anyway. More some people expressing confusion at the need for a gay specific con, and then other people first saying "well you couldn't possibly understand," and once someone comes in saying they probably could, being told they don't have a place in the discussion, because they're straight. Which is really ironic, since this is supposed to be a completely inclusive convention. Although why they didn't just call it something like "gamers without labels" if that's what they wanted is beyond me.

You misunderstand. Nobody's saying that straight people can't ask about the gay specific con, I'm saying that straight people have no business inserting themselves in a discussion that doesn't affect them at all. It's like a man butting into a conversation between women to talk to them about periods or pregnancy. Unless he's a physician or similarly qualified expert, he has no business talking about something he's not a part of and will never affect him (unless he has a pregnant/menstruating wife/girlfriend, and even then he's being affected very indirectly).

One of the hallmarks of male privilege, for example, is the firm belief that you as a man have a right to have your opinion heard and taken seriously by women, regardless of subject, while at the same time rolling your eyes or dismissing women's opinion on topics like sports, cars, business or the like. This is what you're doing here. You're dismissing the problems, wants and needs of the LGBT community while complaining that your opinion ought to be taken seriously.

The convention isn't about equality or inclusion. It's about giving the LGBT community a safe space that caters to them and thinks about their problems and neglected wants and needs within the gamer community. Whether this is a good idea in the long term or not, and whether it's hypocritical of us as a community or not is up for debate, yes, but it's an internal matter within the community. It doesn't concern straight people because the problems that we face are not your problems, and the decisions we're making do not affect you at all. We don't have to include straight people in that discussion because it doesn't concern them at all. It would be like a random stranger from another city asking to be included in a conversation about what colour to paint your bedroom. It's absolutely irrelevant for them and you are not obligated to listen to their opinion at all.

 

[TKretts3]

I personally, like others, don't see how a GayCon would be any different from a regular con in terms of content, but I also don't see the point of conventions all together. However, I still don't understand how something like this would be any different by doing this.

Of course that isn't to say that they should do it. After all, a group organizing a convention can dictate it however they wish, as long as the venue agrees with it. If one only wants to allow gay, lesbian, and bi people they can do that, or if one only wants to allow straight people, they can do that too. Of course that's not to say that people can't disagree, it's just to say that if they want to exclude a certain group they have every right to do so.

And as for the whole 'inclusion' thing, I really don't see where people are coming from. I've never once gone to a gay only, or gay oriented event before and I've never felt disfranchised or not included.

 

[TKretts3]

I personally, like others, don't see how a GayCon would be any different from a regular con in terms of content, but I also don't see the point of conventions all together. However, I still don't understand how something like this would be any different by doing this.

Of course that isn't to say that they should do it. After all, a group organizing a convention can dictate it however they wish, as long as the venue agrees with it. If one only wants to allow gay, lesbian, and bi people they can do that, or if one only wants to allow straight people, they can do that too. Of course that's not to say that people can't disagree, it's just to say that if they want to exclude a certain group they have every right to do so.

You do realise straight people are allowed attend right? Cons are generally straight focused, because gaming is generally white -hetero-male focused. Cons have booth babes and marketing aimed at hetero males. Passive aggressive gay bashing and just straight up gay bashing goes on in gaming culture. This is just a con where the LGBT community is the norm and the focus.

A friend of mine is gay and attends a lot (Read, A LOT) of them every year, and the way I hear him talk about them suggest more that the non gay oriented Cons aren't exactly 'focused' towards any crowd except for the subject of the Con. However, in terms of the booth babes I can certainly agree that it's focused to attract straight male gamers, though I would mainly criticize the owners of the venues for that. As for marketing, I don't see how it's focused at straight gamers. Would you care to explain?

 

[Daveman]

On the topic of not liking gay people, it's not that I don't like gay people, it's just I hate flamboyance. I hate really camp people that are straight too. I mean it's probably just that all the gay guys I've met have been preening arseholes, but I don't judge every gay based on those guys twattishness.

I also think musicals are for retarded people who don't understand subtlety.

 

[Darken12]

As for marketing, I don't see how it's focused at straight gamers. Would you care to explain?

Here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.397621-On-Gaymers-and-Cons?page=7#16241470]. To sum up: straight white males are the default, according to the game industry.

 

[The Wooster]

Edit: Also, minor nitpick, that's not a heterosexual flag on that guy's T-shirt in the first panel. It's an asexual flag. Kind of an odd mistake to make on a site that has such an unusually high percentage of self proclaimed asexuals.

Not quite. The asexual rainbow has a purple bar. There isn't really a "straight" rainbow, but the one we chose is based on an actual T shirt.

 

[TKretts3]

How is it implied, and whats so diferent in Gaymercon, other then whats obvious? No, im curious.

Im not against it, if the advantage of making these are so big, but I feel like it makes it harder to get to equality if people keep separating themselves, though I know im probably just freakin naive.

We're gamers, so let's look at games. For games that have the option of making a character of any race, sexuality or gender, we have a disproportionate amount of "straight white male" as the default. See the Dragon Age:Origins trailer [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SuJ5T9sfAA], the Dragon Age II trailer [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlACgYHtWCI], the Mass Effect posters (I [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d9/Mass_Effect_poster.jpg], II [http://johnnybgamer.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/mass-effect-2-poster.jpg] and III [http://www.nzgameshop.com/product_images/posters/video_game_posters/mass_effect_3_iii_maxi_poster_raw.jpg]), and this is BioWare, who is arguably the most egalitarian and inclusive studio. It gets worse from there.

Then we have a comparison between Uncharted and Tomb Raider, two similar games with protagonists of opposite gender. Uncharted has a male lead. He's covered head to toe in practical clothing [http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120715091917/fantendo/images/7/71/NathanDrake.png]. Tomb Raider's female lead, on the other hand, has exposed legs, midriff, arms and cleavage [http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QWiwZvIq9hQ/TJuYM21bGsI/AAAAAAAAAe4/9MtjcqLtgwE/s1600/lara-croft-2.jpg]. Why? Because Lara Croft is meant to be a character for straight males to drool over, while Nathan Drake is a character for straight white males to project into. Lara Croft is a sexual fantasy, Nathan Drake is a power fantasy. Both are aimed at straight white males.

In relation to the trailers and box art, they're not appealing to straight white males, but rather to males in general. They show footage and images of attractive - sexy - males. That is, they're tall, muscular, tan, et cetera. Unless you're trying to say that gay males can't be muscular, which I very much doubt you're saying considering the tone of your post, I don't see how those trailers and box art apply. They do very much show how oriented towards males, and to whites, marketing is, though.

As for the Laura Croft/Nathan Drake angle, your analysis is completely true. In fact I'm only writing this because you forgot to mention that Nathan Drake is a sexy beast.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

The 'segregation' argument from people baffles me. I mean, if you're going to look at it like that, surely gay pride parades/celebrations, or LGBT rights groups, or even university groups, of which I am involved in, would all also come under the same blanket.

It's nice to see that at least some people get it, its about fitting in, and to not have to worry about people treating you differently.

But they do come under the same blanket and are complained about and it's not about fitting in. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that gay people feel out of place at a fucking gaming convention, where nerds and outcasts parade around in bright costuming that they've spent a year creating.

 

[saleem]

Thats not the point, if someone did do a heterocon it would get blasted by every gay rights group out there for being a bigoted and homophobic venture. It's double standards and that defeats the whole point of such movements in the first place as they are supposed to eliminate double standards NOT propagate them.

Not even going to bother with this side of things anymore. I already addressed why things wont be called that, and why it would be bad if they were.

How typical, its so easy to decry established group for bias and bigotry but when a minority does the same its just fine and dandy or it doesnt exists or doesnt warrant addressing. Bigotry exists on both sides of the coin.

 

[wizzy555]

Grey seems to think that people who disagree with him on this issue or either naive or dicks. There are many more possibilities such as they are applying a strict interpretation of the "separate is not equal" principle.

 

[Blaster395]

Thats not the point, if someone did do a heterocon it would get blasted by every gay rights group out there for being a bigoted and homophobic venture. It's double standards and that defeats the whole point of such movements in the first place as they are supposed to eliminate double standards NOT propagate them.

Not even going to bother with this side of things anymore. I already addressed why things wont be called that, and why it would be bad if they were.

How typical, its so easy to decry established group for bias and bigotry but when a minority does the same its just fine and dandy or it doesnt exists or doesnt warrant addressing. Bigotry exists on both sides of the coin.

There would be no purpose in a heterocon because almost every convention is already 95% the way to being a heterocon.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

First they have their own bars, now their own conventions... both probably being really good places to meet people you could connect with. That's pretty greedy, gays!

My anger is fake, but my jealousy is somewhat real.

 

[sadmac]

Looking at the comic... did he just compare being gay to a religion? And then compare it to a gender?

*headdesk*

 

[mechashiva77]

Looking at the comic... did he just compare being gay to a religion? And then compare it to a gender?

*headdesk*

He's not comparing homosexuality to any of those things, he's using different situations to point out how silly the mentality is.

 

[Vault101]

On the topic of not liking gay people, it's not that I don't like gay people, it's just I hate flamboyance. I hate really camp people that are straight too. I mean it's probably just that all the gay guys I've met have been preening arseholes, but I don't judge every gay based on those guys twattishness.

well flamboyant people are gonna be famboyant people...gotta learn to deal with it

[quote/]I also think musicals are for retarded people who don't understand subtlety.[/quote]
please don;t tell me your honestly serious

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Looking at the comic... did he just compare being gay to a religion? And then compare it to a gender?

*headdesk*

He's not comparing homosexuality to any of those things, he's using different situations to point out how silly the mentality is.

By applying it in circumstances that are very different? He was drawing(pun!) comparisons...

I don't care if there is a gay-orientated gaming convention, but the cartoon doesn't strike me as being at all clever.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

On the topic of not liking gay people, it's not that I don't like gay people, it's just I hate flamboyance. I hate really camp people that are straight too. I mean it's probably just that all the gay guys I've met have been preening arseholes, but I don't judge every gay based on those guys twattishness.

I also think musicals are for retarded people who don't understand subtlety.

Not sure what your intent for that post was since you're really making a terrible case for yourself when you say you're not judgey then randomly insult people with different theatrical tastes than you.

 

[DataSnake]

Simple exercise for straight people who don't understand the appeal of Gaymercon: go there. Take note of how you feel in an environment specifically geared toward people whose sexuality is different from your own. You may notice you feel a bit uncomfortable because you're in the minority, even though (hopefully) nobody's being overtly or intentionally hostile to you. That's how gay people feel at "normal" cons. Is it any wonder they want a place where they can hang out with fellow gamers without that niggling discomfort prodding at the back of their mind?

 

[psijac]

That is a sandwich they serve at Denny's its grilled cheese with Mozzarella stick inserted between the slices. Just because you are combining two things you like doesn't make the new thing better. It probably won't provide a better experience than enjoying those thing separately.

Everyone in favor of this idea will take the easy way out like the author of the comic and say, "That's because you're just lactose intolerant."

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

"Straightmers" already exist. They're called gamers. That's why we have "girl gamers" too, because the default is the straight white male.

I think it is an important distinction to make that homosexuals and heterosexuals do not play video games, people do. That is to say that they are people first, everything else at least should come secondary. It is true that the majority of these people consequently happen to be heterosexual males. Currently this majority is being blatantly targeted in various ways in the industry and society in general, but a person's sexuality doesn't have to have anything to do with the medium or their way of living nor should it. It shouldn't be a defining factor, a simple piece of information that is consciously taken into account and misused.

I just don't see how further seperating people who for example happen to play video games into various sub-groups helps create equality in the long-term. A sense of recognition perhaps, but not of equality or unity.

I explain that here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.397621-On-Gaymers-and-Cons?page=10#16243804]. The short version is "I call myself differently because that word doesn't apply to me." Women, LGBT people and people of colour are never going to get what they want (entertainment aimed at them) if they continue to be quiet while the entertainment industry pretends they don't exist. Quietly accepting the gamer label means quietly accepting the tacit implication that you're assumed to be a straight white male by the industry. That is not going to get you anywhere.

Do you not see the exclusion you're promoting, though? You're taking the perception that gays aren't welcome at regular cons, and basically saying "well, since we're not welcome there, you're not welcome in this discussion." It doesn't really come across as inclusive to me. It's not even really a debate, anyway. More some people expressing confusion at the need for a gay specific con, and then other people first saying "well you couldn't possibly understand," and once someone comes in saying they probably could, being told they don't have a place in the discussion, because they're straight. Which is really ironic, since this is supposed to be a completely inclusive convention. Although why they didn't just call it something like "gamers without labels" if that's what they wanted is beyond me.

You misunderstand. Nobody's saying that straight people can't ask about the gay specific con, I'm saying that straight people have no business inserting themselves in a discussion that doesn't affect them at all. It's like a man butting into a conversation between women to talk to them about periods or pregnancy. Unless he's a physician or similarly qualified expert, he has no business talking about something he's not a part of and will never affect him (unless he has a pregnant/menstruating wife/girlfriend, and even then he's being affected very indirectly).

One of the hallmarks of male privilege, for example, is the firm belief that you as a man have a right to have your opinion heard and taken seriously by women, regardless of subject, while at the same time rolling your eyes or dismissing women's opinion on topics like sports, cars, business or the like. This is what you're doing here. You're dismissing the problems, wants and needs of the LGBT community while complaining that your opinion ought to be taken seriously.

The convention isn't about equality or inclusion. It's about giving the LGBT community a safe space that caters to them and thinks about their problems and neglected wants and needs within the gamer community. Whether this is a good idea in the long term or not, and whether it's hypocritical of us as a community or not is up for debate, yes, but it's an internal matter within the community. It doesn't concern straight people because the problems that we face are not your problems, and the decisions we're making do not affect you at all. We don't have to include straight people in that discussion because it doesn't concern them at all. It would be like a random stranger from another city asking to be included in a conversation about what colour to paint your bedroom. It's absolutely irrelevant for them and you are not obligated to listen to their opinion at all.

Actually, I'm offering my opinion as a human being. If this con is about getting out and meeting other gay people in the context of a gaming convention, that's awesome. Conventions in general, for just about anything, tend to be hookup central anyway, and gay people have it harder with that by virtue of only making up 10% of the population. That wasn't a "gays are promiscuous" stereotype, it was a "people (period) hook up at conventions" truth.

The problem I have with this convention, is that's not what it's being framed as. It's being framed as this awesome step for gay rights, when it's really not. If anything, if that's the goal, it's a step back, not forward. Calling white privilege doesn't make my opinion on /that/ any less valid. For cryin' out loud, my parents (and therefore I) were heavily involved with the ACLU while I was growing up, and would be today if my mother and I weren't too busy completing our degrees (my Bachelors, her Law degree) to be involved. So not only have I lived activism, I've been formally trained on a lot of good ways to do it. Gone to Washington to lobby and everything. Plus, my degree is in social science ed -- I've studied a lot of this from an academic perspective, too. But I'm straight, so obviously my opinion doesn't count. Gotcha.

Edit: Hell, "Problem" is too strong of a word. I started out playing devil's advocate and pointing out that certain people who were defending it in the name of tolerance were being themselves intolerant. Then internet arguments being the polarizing cesspits they are, I wound up getting more and more personally invested in something that really, I don't give two craps about. It's a convention for gays, cool. That's not what really bothers me. What bothers me is people saying "well you're white, straight, and male, so even though you're a gamer who is involved enough in the hobby to be posting on a forum dedicated to it, and are therefore probably a huge nerd (which means you were also probably a social outcast growing up) you're straight, and therefore you know nothing about being a social outcast." Don't just call white privilege and be done with it if you want things to change. When you're talking to people with that privilege, try putting it into terms they can understand. Like, say, reminding a nerd of middle or high school bullying. They just might get it.