If you play a videogame with someone, they don't know your sexuality. Hell, if you don't use voice chat online they don't even know your gender.Guestyman said:You can't honestly believe that *we're* the ones who are bringing sexuality into this. Gaymercon is the *result* not the *cause* of gay people being isolated within gaming culture. I would like nothing better than for my sexuality not to be an issue with wider gaming culture but wider gaming culture doesn't give us that luxury.secretsantaone said:I'm using segregation in the sense of intentionally separating yourselves, which I would say you are doing by labelling yourself a "gay gamer", simply because you're bringing sexuality into an area that has nothing to do with it.
I'm saying that the reason they use ****** is simply because people get offended by it, not because of any deep-seated fear or hatred of homosexuals. If people found "flopsy-wopsy-ears" as offensive as ******, I dare say they would use that instead.
If you're so concerned about people bringing sexuality into an area that has nothing to do with it, don't tell me. I don't want my sexuality brought into it. Tell it to the straight people who decided my sexuality was such a hot button issue that they made me feel unsafe in my own subculture. Tell the idiotic bigots on livechat and at cons that my sexuality shouldn't be brought into gaming. Gaymercon *Wouldn't need to exist* if people didn't keep on bringing other people's sexuality into places where it needn't be discussed.
And if you can't see why casual use of "******" as a slur within a group betrays a culture of homophobia within that group then there's really no hope for this discussion going forward.
However, if you play in such a competitive and immature environment such as XBL, people are going to call you bad words. It really doesn't matter what you are, they'll find some way to offend you and make it stick. The same way that people will say they slept with your mother last night, of course they fucking didn't, but people get defensive of their mothers and take offense. This person is trying to offend you, no matter what your sexuality. It just so happens "******" is a great way to cause offense.
Take "bastard". Literally it means a child who's parents weren't married when they were conceived. This was bad back in the day when sex outside of marriage was considered a cardinal sin and the resulting bastards would be cursed. Nowadays, children outside of marriage are pretty commonplace, there's no longer the same social stigma attached to the concept. However "bastard" is still a general pejorative term and is still considered a pretty serious swear word. This is because people associate it now with offense rather than it's original meaning.Guestyman said:No. It hasn't. And this argument actually makes me angry. The word ******, or the use of "Gay" as an insult doesn't occur because the words have magically changed their meaning to just mean bad without also meaning homosexual. The use of "Gay" or "******" is an insult because it is performing the following logical chain.secretsantaone said:Not to mention how the word ****** has evolved into a much more general pejorative term than just meaning gay.
You = homosexual
homosexual = bad
thereby through the transitive property:
you = bad
it's not because the etymological meaning of the word has magically changed so that Gay and ****** are just synonyms for "Bad thing" independent of their other 'homosexual' meaning. If it was just the word and not it's homosexual meaning it wouldn't have uniformly happened to every homosexual slurs at the same time.
Or to put it another way: Look at the words that everyone routinely claims have evolved into general pejoratives:
Fag, queer, gay, cocksucker
Do you notice what they all have in common? Do you really think it's just a coincidence that they ALL happened to be used in this way? Because that stretches the bounds of credulity for me. And to you too, I suspect. You're well spoken and can form good arguments. You seem intelligent. Therefore I respect you too much to think you actually believe that utter tripe.
Same with "******", originally targeted towards gay people when homosexuality was not tolerated whatsoever, with the changing social climate and homosexuality becoming more and more accepted by society, it's losing it's impact as "gay = bad" and is instead being used because people associate it with offense.
Darken12 said:And nobody is going to bar straight people from going to Gaymer X. Anybody can turn up so long as they're interested in videogames. The difference is that in a regular con, the focus and aim of the industry is the straight male audience. That's what's different in a gaymer con.
Sorry, but you're not. In such an unstable market no one is going to take the risk of overtly appealing to the "gay gamer" demographic.Darken12 said:And by producing a gaymer con, we can show the industry that we're a viable demographic with plenty of disposable money. If we go to regular cons and keep quiet, the industry is never going to realise that they can make plenty of money off other demographics too.
What do you even want from videogames to make it appeal to homosexuals? Beyond some homosexual relationships in RPGs, what exactly is it that makes videogames to alienating to gays?
I don't really think you can compare yourselves to poor people in the economy. Poor people are directly linked to the economy, homosexuals just aren't the primary target market for videogames because they're too much of a niche market.Darken12 said:Firstly, it can change if there's enough money on the table to tempt the industry. And the industry is never going to know if that money is available if we don't stand up and tell them.secretsantaone said:If you're going so far as to classify yourself as a gamer you like videogames despite this, because it's not going to change as long as videogames cost so much. We all have a hobby that we enjoy, it seems a shame to go bringing in sexuality to divide us up when it's not relevant.
Secondly, of course it's a shame for you, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the industry from your perspective, you're constantly being catered to. It's extremely easy for the rich person to say that they don't see what's wrong with the economy when they're untouched by the problems lower classes complain about.
Ignoring the statement "The biological components of masculinity (muscle mass, body hair, height and so on) have been proven, time and again, to be completely independent from sexual attraction." (which is probably why fat, hairy midgets are so popular with the ladies), of course it's a cultural and social construct born out of homophobia. That doesn't make it any less offensive when you're called it.Darken12 said:Okay. I am going to rein in the massive amount of rage I feel at you right now for attempting to justify why it's okay for straight people to take being LGBT as an insult. I am going to calm down and explain things to you in the most civilised way I'm able.secretsantaone said:Wow thanks for telling me what I really mean buddy, I might have been able to speak for myself there.
Of course straight men being called gay is an insult to masculinity, the straight male role is intrinsically linked to their relationship with females. Implying that they don't have sex with females is essentially an insult to their virility. Also, the word "******" has also taken on the connotations of being weak, further undermining the traditional male role as the strong head of a family.
Like I said, they only say ****** to cause offense. If you're offended by the word, chances are they're gonna keep using it.
Not to mention how the word ****** has evolved into a much more general pejorative term than just meaning gay.
While I do understand why you think that there's an intrinsic connection between straightness (in males) and virility, that's a sociocultural fabrication. If you look at it from a detached, neutral way, the two concepts are unrelated. Heterosexuality is a type of sexual attraction; and virility (or masculinity) is a collection of traits we assign to a gender, some of which are biological, but most of which are cultural. Those traits are absolutely malleable; and they're largely arbitrary, particularly in modern times. The biological components of masculinity (muscle mass, body hair, height and so on) have been proven, time and again, to be completely independent from sexual attraction. This is self-evident as well, given the amount of big, burly, hairy gay men. The cultural traits (mannerisms, fashion and so on) change from culture to culture and are obviously not linked with sexual attraction (or else all cultures would share the same desirable traits for masculinity). So if neither the biological nor the cultural traits assigned to masculinity are related to sexual attraction, we can conclude that heterosexuality in males has nothing to do with their virility.
The best argument you can make is that it's a cultural trait, something that society arbitrarily decides is associated with masculinity, such as ties or sports, which is a very weak justification for accepting homophobia, as this means that being gay should be as inconsequential in one's view of masculinity as refusing to wear ties or having no interest in sports. But even then, this is summarily disproved by any gay man who does check every box in the list of masculine traits, and the straight man who checks almost none.
Stereotypes. Duh.Darken12 said:Now, onto this new definition of weakness, I am simply going to point out that your implication is that gay men are somehow inferior or incapable of taking on the traditional male role of being a strong head of the family (which is quickly disproved by any gay men at the head of a family, of which there are many around the world).
Don't really see the point of avoiding obscenities and then saying that you wanted to use them. Seems to negate the effort.Darken12 said:As an aside, the sheer amount of willpower I needed to complete this post without launching into an angry tirade of obscenities has been truly awe-inspiring. I consider it a personal milestone achieved.