On Gaymers and Cons

[Novaova]

I mean seriously, is there anyone alive who thinks those christians really thought that D&D gave demonic powers?

I'm going to betray my age here. I was a teenager in the 1980's and raised in the Southern Baptist Church.* Yes, they absolutely believed this. These people believed they were full-on spiritual warriors for Jesus, and that Satan quite literally waited in every shadow to pounce upon the unwary. They practiced the prayers (magic spells, when you think about it) that they would have to boldly shout at a demon if one were to confront them some spooky night. Similarly, they absolutely believed that the D&D books were Satanic ritual manuals.




(*: Obviously I am not still with them.)

 

[Darken12]

Okay, do we actually think that anyone was really afraid D&D was satanic? I mean if i thought that a group of people especially the disenfrancised were getting demonic powers from a gaming manual, would you really go fuck with them?

Seriously?

I've got a book, it gives me demonic powers & you want to take away my book & by extension my demonic powers? An y ou think i'm going to just let you? If only i had some sort of demonic powers i could use to stop you?

I mean seriously, is there anyone alive who thinks those christians really thought that D&D gave demonic powers?

Yes, there are people who genuinely believe the devil gives you magic powers. But they aren't "I melt people with my eyes and can project a shield that makes me immune to everything" powers. They see them as "evil eye", "disease" or "misfortune" powers, weaksauce curses and hexes. The worst thing Christians think Satanists can do is use their "magic" to corrupt people into sinning, which would still be weaksauce charm powers.

 

[Darken12]

*snip*

Listen. This has been covered before. They weren't comparing specific instances, they were comparing attitudes, that's why you see the same guy with the same smug face on all panels. Could it have been done better? I have no idea, I'm not a webcomic expert or connoisseur. But if you have an issue with the way they chose to portray their message, you could elaborate a calm constructive criticism instead of flipping.

As for the bit about how "straight people feel bad too", let me repeat myself as I have done over and over in the thread:

It's a gross generalization to just assume someone else has had it easy for those reasons.

Privilege has nothing to do with the overall outcome of your life. Privilege means that society has given you an invisible bag of tools, keys and maps for your journey through life. The more instances of privilege you have, the bigger your bag is (with the biggest bag going to the physically attractive, intelligent, college-educated, rich straight cis white male born into a respected family). Just because your life ended up being crappy doesn't mean you don't have these extra advantages that other people don't have. It's entirely possible that a transgendered lesbian of colour may have had a better life than you, but it's undeniable that you had far more invisible tools at your disposal than her along the way.

Nobody is saying that straight people live in magical paradises of awesomeness and happiness.

 

[Abomination]

I can assure you that people who do that are also obnoxious to NON-homosexual people.

Not every time. Some of them are just socially inept, and have no idea how inconsiderate they're being.

I like to avoid it altogether. I imagine others would to. Therefore, a separate convention.

Yes, every time. The very fact they're asking you about your sex life and you're essentially a complete stranger makes them obnoxious - you being homosexual or not doesn't factor into how they're being unsavoury.

That being said, how would attending a homosexual friendly convention prevent this type of conversation? I imagine it would actually have a higher chance of taking place given how homosexuality will be the topic on the tip of every tongue.

Wat.

You think we all hang out talking about specifically gay things?

No, if we're at a Gaming Convention, we're going to talk about games.
Beyond the occasional "I'd hit that" on a poster (Mentioned in the other part of your multi-quote post), those types of things don't happen at a "higher rate" just because we're gay.

But you won't be at a gaming convention. You will be at a Homosexual Oriented Gaming Convention. Clearly the homosexuality aspect will be prevalent in at least one shape or form and certainly more prevalent than a regular Gaming Convention.

Also, it's homosexual oriented, not homosexual exclusive - so there are likely to be curious heterosexual gamers attending, maybe they will have a few questions for their queer comrades. And the one thing we all know about the gamer stereotype is high frequencies of social awkwardness.

Yes, every time. The very fact they're asking you about your sex life and you're essentially a complete stranger makes them obnoxious - you being homosexual or not doesn't factor into how they're being unsavoury.

Her point is that they wouldn't ask if she wasn't gay. Her homosexuality is treated as an acceptable excuse to be obnoxious (as you can see by the people in this very thread).

It isn't an acceptable excuse despite what an individual thinks, that's what makes it obnoxious and that's how obnoxious people operate.

A person who thinks it is an acceptable excuse is obnoxious to both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

That being said, how would attending a homosexual friendly convention prevent this type of conversation? I imagine it would actually have a higher chance of taking place given how homosexuality will be the topic on the tip of every tongue.

If those people are LGBT, it's a matter of internal policing. We take care of it on our own. As a community, we are capable of self-regulation and enforcing social standards that make us feel comfortable.

If they're straight, we can assume the number of such cases will be lessened significantly, and if they do happen, we will deal with it knowing that our problems will be taken seriously and not ignored.

Is that type of behaviour ignored/considered acceptable at other gaming cons?

Just so I have this right, someone either intentionally or inadvertently outs themselves as being homosexual in some way. In reaction to that someone -looks- at them, for whatever reason, and that's an issue? I confess when someone hints at themselves at being homosexual I will give them more than a casual once-over as I find homosexual people to be generally endearing and I appreciate their presence and company.

There is a difference between looking and staring. A stare is an intense look that is prolonged far, far more than is socially acceptable, often combined with an undesirable feeling (such as prejudice, in this case), to the point where the person feels visibly uncomfortable. Often this visible discomfort does not cause the staring to stop. The timeframe of this is in dozens of seconds or several minutes, not mere seconds. There is a very strong difference between looking and staring.

A few minutes? We're talking about some seriously strange people, and to be honest they MUST be a very small minority of individuals who attend gaming conventions.

PDA generates stares, no matter the sexual orientation of the affectionate.

Depends on the PDA. Kissing and overt groping of sexual parts, sure. But holding hands, hugging, putting an arm casually around someone, sharing personal space, making eyes at each other, flirting and other PG displays of PDA do not generate stares when done by straight couples. They do generate stares, whispering, mocking or outright name-calling when done by same-sex couples.

Stares and whispers I can understand since homosexuality is still "novel" and a curiosity for many (myself included). The mocking and name-calling is grounds for removal in any gaming convention. Contact security.

I can understand the confrontation, the threats, physical violence being something folks would want to avoid - but all of those things are grounds for removal from a gaming convention. Contact security and you've taken care of the problem. When someone gets thrown out of a convention they paid money to because they were inconsiderate it actually tends to learn them pretty damn quick.

I cannot vouch for regular cons (someone else should field that one for me), but it could be possible to do something like that and leave no evidence to present to security. Even without that, I can assure you that it's possible to ruin someone's day without doing anything illegal. Like I said before, staring, whispering, mocking, laughing, name-calling, etc. Nobody's gonna get kicked from a con because of that. They will blame us, saying we're overreacting, playing the victim, that this is perfectly normal, etc. We end up having to swallow the humiliation and passive hostility, and then straight people get arrogant and dismissive when we say we want our own con.

Mocking, laughing and name-calling WILL get you removed from a con. Not the first time it is done but the individual would receive a stern warning. The second time the individual would be out on their ass. Any security company worth their salt will quickly remove such delinquents.

Are you saying I am being arrogant and dismissive?

 

[Darken12]

It isn't an acceptable excuse despite what an individual thinks, that's what makes it obnoxious and that's how obnoxious people operate.

A person who thinks it is an acceptable excuse is obnoxious to both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Yes, but what I'm saying is that while those people understand that such comments are inappropriate in a heterosexual setting (unless it's between extremely close friends), they think that the fact that she's gay makes it okay (often in the guise of harmless/scientific curiosity). I agree that it's obnoxious regardless, but what I'm saying is that a lot of people think that LGBT people are a curiosity and prodding is seen as completely natural. It's actually even worse with trans people. I've heard about trans people being asked deeply personal questions about passing (and specially regarding their genitals, which is an incredibly inappropriate thing to ask to a stranger or mere acquaintance), and they implied that this sort of thing is disappointingly common.

Clearly social boundaries are not being respected here, and the only reason this happens is because we are LGBT (because these otherwise socially aware people don't do that sort of thing with straight people).

Is that type of behaviour ignored/considered acceptable at other gaming cons?

A few minutes? We're talking about some seriously strange people, and to be honest they MUST be a very small minority of individuals who attend gaming conventions.

Stares and whispers I can understand since homosexuality is still "novel" and a curiosity for many (myself included). The mocking and name-calling is grounds for removal in any gaming convention. Contact security.

Mocking, laughing and name-calling WILL get you removed from a con. Not the first time it is done but the individual would receive a stern warning. The second time the individual would be out on their ass. Any security company worth their salt will quickly remove such delinquents.

I can't really dispute any of these, since my country doesn't do cons. I am still not entirely convinced of what you're saying here, but I cannot back up my disagreement beyond a general feeling of "That can't be right." So I'm letting someone who has had actual experience take this one.

Are you saying I am being arrogant and dismissive?

Nope, you are quite civil, though I remain unconvinced. I can easily imagine security guards dismissing the complaints of an LGBT person because they can't back up their accusations, their complaints seem ridiculous in their eyes, or they have no witnesses. I've seen it happen in places other than gaming cons, and I have no reason to believe that it would be any different there, especially with the homophobic slant in gamer culture.

 

[Abomination]

It isn't an acceptable excuse despite what an individual thinks, that's what makes it obnoxious and that's how obnoxious people operate.

A person who thinks it is an acceptable excuse is obnoxious to both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Yes, but what I'm saying is that while those people understand that such comments are inappropriate in a heterosexual setting (unless it's between extremely close friends), they think that the fact that she's gay makes it okay (often in the guise of harmless/scientific curiosity). I agree that it's obnoxious regardless, but what I'm saying is that a lot of people think that LGBT people are a curiosity and prodding is seen as completely natural. It's actually even worse with trans people. I've heard about trans people being asked deeply personal questions about passing (and specially regarding their genitals, which is an incredibly inappropriate thing to ask to a stranger or mere acquaintance), and they implied that this sort of thing is disappointingly common.

Clearly social boundaries are not being respected here, and the only reason this happens is because we are LGBT (because these otherwise socially aware people don't do that sort of thing with straight people).

I can assure you that a MAJORITY of people do not believe asking homosexual people those types of questions is acceptable. Believe it or not but the negative attitudes displayed to homosexuals is now only being conducted by a minority. I mean, it might be a 40/60 on average between countries now but the decency war is being won. I think that's why many people are concerned about this type of convention. It's viewed as a strategically poor decision, a retreat when homosexuals should be on the offensive (as in not shying away from the public, the easiest way to become accepted is to show you are not going anywhere).

As for the transexuals having questions asked of their genitals... I can't quite fault the public for it. Let's be honest with ourselves, there are varying levels of transexuality. The 'big' step is physically removing/installing the primary defining feature between the genders. It is also something that people can simply not empathise with easily - I've been in close contact with transexuals for damn well 10 years now and I still can't empathise with the procdure, still leaving me deathly curious. How often have the transexuals just said "Enough about me, I want to talk about YOUR penis/vagina." and made the opposite party realise that, in their curiosity, they crossed a line?

Is that type of behaviour ignored/considered acceptable at other gaming cons?

A few minutes? We're talking about some seriously strange people, and to be honest they MUST be a very small minority of individuals who attend gaming conventions.

Stares and whispers I can understand since homosexuality is still "novel" and a curiosity for many (myself included). The mocking and name-calling is grounds for removal in any gaming convention. Contact security.

Mocking, laughing and name-calling WILL get you removed from a con. Not the first time it is done but the individual would receive a stern warning. The second time the individual would be out on their ass. Any security company worth their salt will quickly remove such delinquents.

I can't really dispute any of these, since my country doesn't do cons. I am still not entirely convinced of what you're saying here, but I cannot back up my disagreement beyond a general feeling of "That can't be right." So I'm letting someone who has had actual experience take this one.

The feeling of "That can't be right." as in you don't believe that the general public can identify obnoxious/unacceptable behavior? Or do you believe the general public still has a hard on for disliking homosexuals?

As I mentioned before, the "allies" are starting to far outnumber the "enemy".

Are you saying I am being arrogant and dismissive?

Nope, you are quite civil, though I remain unconvinced. I can easily imagine security guards dismissing the complaints of an LGBT person because they can't back up their accusations, their complaints seem ridiculous in their eyes, or they have no witnesses. I've seen it happen in places other than gaming cons, and I have no reason to believe that it would be any different there, especially with the homophobic slant in gamer culture.

Considering how much gaming conventions rely on the internet for their promotion and advertising they can not afford that kind of bad press. Media would dive on that like piranhas on a cow carcass. Imagine if Penny Arcade got wind of it.

And that's just the pragmatic commercial reason. The other reason is because the "homophobic slant" in gamer culture is at the very end of the bell curve of gamers. The XBox live kiddies and "dudebros" are, unfortunately, a PART of gamer culture. But they hardly represent gamer culture as a whole. Just as much as how "queens" are a part of LGBT culture but do not represent the entirety of LGBTs (not saying anything is bad with queens, just a demographical comparison). Lizard and reptiles, yeah? The homophobics are just the most vocal (and annoying) of gaming culture. Those who can afford the time, transport, potential social stigma and cost of attending a gaming convention are NOT part of the XBox Live Kiddies or Dudebro brigade.

 

[The Material Sheep]

See, I feel a lot of straight white males who are not bigoted in realistic way, see themselves in a position where everyone is blaming them for a lot of things they didn't have any control of and can't justifiably have any responsibility for. They aren't racist, they aren't bigoted against homosexuals, so why should they be left out or excluded? Why should they be grouped in with those who did? In some respects I see the argument for privilege, but it's still not justified to act as if that is an any and all pass to exclude or send unnecessary guilt towards. Which I see a lot of.

As a homosexual white woman, hell... I don't know... Privilege is a hard to deal with, I live well and my job is fine. The worst time for me was in highschool, but I don't know many people who had a good highschool experience. I don't know why we NEED a gay gamer convention. I don't know why it's a big deal that it exists either though. I've been to other conventions before (PAX specifically, I hated it but that's just because I hate crowds) and I didn't feel singled out or not appealed to. Just seemed like games, and games...and lots of games... Like a gaming convention should be I would suppose. However I'm not much of a convention goer... so my situation is anecdotal at best.

All in all... I really don't know how I specifically feel on the matter. I can see why white guys feel defensive about the matter, as most of the time they haven't actually done anything to deserve it. I can also see how the nebulous idea of privilege can be a irritating for those who aren't in the straight white male group. At the end of the day.... this is a situation I feel Grey was shooting a low hanging fruit and strawmaning a not so straight forward problem in a place I don't feel he would be challenged all that seriously for. So yeah. I have conflicted opinions.

 

[Darken12]

I can assure you that a MAJORITY of people do not believe asking homosexual people those types of questions is acceptable. Believe it or not but the negative attitudes displayed to homosexuals is now only being conducted by a minority. I mean, it might be a 40/60 on average between countries now but the decency war is being won. I think that's why many people are concerned about this type of convention. It's viewed as a strategically poor decision, a retreat when homosexuals should be on the offensive (as in not shying away from the public, the easiest way to become accepted is to show you are not going anywhere).

And that might be a fair point, but that's not the only purpose of the con. It's a good way for the LGBT community to send a message to the gaming industry (and, secondarily, to the gamer community as a whole) that we exist in significant numbers, and that we are worth to be considered and afforded the same attention as the straight male demographic.

But above that, this is ultimately up to the LGBT community. Like I said before in this thread, it's better for the LGBT community to be allowed to decide for itself what is in its best interest (and be allowed to fail and make mistakes), than to continue to do as (in this case, well-meaning) straight people tell them.

As for the transexuals having questions asked of their genitals... I can't quite fault the public for it. Let's be honest with ourselves, there are varying levels of transexuality. The 'big' step is physically removing/installing the primary defining feature between the genders. It is also something that people can simply not empathise with easily - I've been in close contact with transexuals for damn well 10 years now and I still can't empathise with the procdure, still leaving me deathly curious. How often have the transexuals just said "Enough about me, I want to talk about YOUR penis/vagina." and made the opposite party realise that, in their curiosity, they crossed a line?

Why should they? Why should lesbians ask straight men if they enjoy being pegged by their girlfriends, for example? Why do we have to tell you that you've just made us uncomfortable? There's a reason women have always pushed for stricter sexual harassment laws, because it shouldn't be up to them to tell men when they've crossed the line. Men should be able to restrain themselves and behave like rational human beings. Women shouldn't have to be on the defensive all the time because men think it's okay to touch them or speak to them inappropriately. And the same goes for the LGBT community. We should not have to be on the lookout for straight people who have no concept of boundaries. And it's not just trans people and lesbians, I myself have been the target of morbid curiosity by straight people who ask them most inappropriate questions about man-on-man sex/romance (and often it's hard to tell if they're closeted, secretly mocking me or think I'm not a human being but an interesting alien species).

This is entitlement, and we shouldn't have to stand for it.

The feeling of "That can't be right." as in you don't believe that the general public can identify obnoxious/unacceptable behavior? Or do you believe the general public still has a hard on for disliking homosexuals?

Both, really. As someone mentioned in the thread before, anti-gay hate crimes are on the rise [http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/12/13/fbi-anti-gay-hate-crime-rising-while-other-hate-crimes-fall/] (while other hate crimes are on the decline). And look at some of the people on this very thread: some people aren't "I want to burn you alive" homophobic, but they're certainly annoyed that "the gays are doing this or that" and the attitude that comes off is basically "pfeh, these gays just want to stand out" without giving us the benefit of the doubt that hey, maybe being LGBT isn't sunshine and roses, and maybe there's a legitimate reason for doing this. It might not be hate-crime-homophobic, but it's still pretty damn discriminatory to be dismissed as a vapid attention-seeker who clearly needs the wise straight person to tell me what to do to achieve my own goals.

As I mentioned before, the "allies" are starting to far outnumber the "enemy".

Would that it was true.

Considering how much gaming conventions rely on the internet for their promotion and advertising they can not afford that kind of bad press. Media would dive on that like piranhas on a cow carcass. Imagine if Penny Arcade got wind of it.

I don't know, look at the Anita Sarkeesian debacle. Or hell, look at any time anyone says that something related to gamer culture is sexist, homophobic, racist, etc. Games have been under fire by the media for so long that any criticism levied by minorities or oppressed groups is met with a knee-jerk reaction of utter rage. Gamer culture is extremely defensive. I mean, look at this con. It hasn't even criticised or threatened anything, and yet it's met with reactions from disapproval to bitter scorn.

And that's just the pragmatic commercial reason. The other reason is because the "homophobic slant" in gamer culture is at the very end of the bell curve of gamers. The XBox live kiddies and "dudebros" are, unfortunately, a PART of gamer culture. But they hardly represent gamer culture as a whole. Just as much as how "queens" are a part of LGBT culture but do not represent the entirety of LGBTs (not saying anything is bad with queens, just a demographical comparison). Lizard and reptiles, yeah? The homophobics are just the most vocal (and annoying) of gaming culture. Those who can afford the time, transport, potential social stigma and cost of attending a gaming convention are NOT part of the XBox Live Kiddies or Dudebro brigade.

I don't know, a lot of the people in this thread who have been against the idea of the con (and haven't been civil like you and a few others) have never stricken me as kiddies or dudebros. I honestly, genuinely hope you're right, though.

 

[Jayemsal]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

 

[Abomination]

and that we are worth to be considered and afforded the same attention as the straight male demographic.

But you're not worth it. And I mean that in the literal sense of the word "worth", or "value" or perhaps "profit".

The best you can hope for is to establish yourselves as a niche market to be exploited. Gaming is an industry that produces art. The fact is it will not be profitable for a many companies to attempt the risky, untried venture of homosexual... focused (?) games given the size of the potential demographic.

I would like to see a homosexual protagonist (as in a 100% homosexual, not an optional like Shepard or Hawke, though good on Bioware for really making grounds in AAA titles by including openly homosexual characters who are people are not just their sexuality), I just don't know if any company is willing to risk the launch of such a title.

I guess the convention will prove that an indie developer could start up homosexual focused games or games with homosexual protagonists and there's a market ripe, demanding and willing to be exploited.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

Is it there? Yes. Rampant? Not been my experience, and is likely an extreme overreaction and thinking as if the xboxlive crowd count for a good chunk of the gamer population.

 

[The Material Sheep]

=double post-

 

[Abomination]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

What a completely idiotic thing to say and it's wrong on two levels.

First, homophobia is not "rampant" in the community. It is loud, obnoxious and disgusting, yes, but hardly "rampant" which implies accepted or a majority.

Second, the presence of discrimination or persecution does not make the person who asks the question a dick. They are likely asking because they want to know what has driven their homosexual comrades to wanting to create a place like this. It makes them concerned that there is supposedly "rampant" homophobia at gaming conventions.

So the person who is likely concerned for the wellbeing of the homosexual community is a "dick" for asking why they are taking actions that reflect some form of issue. That is absurd.

 

[Jayemsal]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

Is it there? Yes. Rampant? Not been my experience, and is likely an extreme overreaction and thinking as if the xboxlive crowd count for a good chunk of the gamer population.

Let me clarify.

I am a transgender female.

I am not "passable".

I experience this every day from the gamer community, and not only amongst xbox live.

I may be slightly biased.

 

[Jayemsal]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

What a completely idiotic thing to say and it's wrong on two levels.

First, homophobia is not "rampant" in the community. It is loud, obnoxious and disgusting, yes, but hardly "rampant" which implies accepted or a majority.

Second, the presence of discrimination or persecution does not make the person who asks the question a dick. They are likely asking because they want to know what has driven their homosexual comrades to wanting to create a place like this. It makes them concerned that there is supposedly "rampant" homophobia at gaming conventions.

So the person who is likely concerned for the wellbeing of the homosexual community is a "dick" for asking why they are taking actions that reflect some form of issue. That is absurd.

I can speak well enough without you puttin words in my mouth, thanks.

I can perfectly well understand that one might ask this from an innocent perspective, it does not change my life experience on this subject, nor my passion in my description.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Umm... I actually don't understand why the LGBT -community would need their own gaming convention. There isn't anything dickish about it though, and I don't see why that particular question even would be dickish.

Because of rampant homophobia in the gamer community.

Is it there? Yes. Rampant? Not been my experience, and is likely an extreme overreaction and thinking as if the xboxlive crowd count for a good chunk of the gamer population.

Let me clarify.

I am a transgender female.

I am not "passable".

I experience this every day from the gamer community, and not only amongst xbox live.

I may be slightly biased.

I'm sorry for your experience. I also know how much harder it is for transgendered vs a lesbian like me, however reactionary stuff and blaming those who have not yet done anything wrong is probably not the best course of action.

Innocent until proven guilty is a better way of dealing with people, in my experience and leads to less bad blood over all.

Bitterness helps no one, not you, and not the person your attacking.

 

[Darken12]

But you're not worth it. And I mean that in the literal sense of the word "worth", or "value" or perhaps "profit".

The best you can hope for is to establish yourselves as a niche market to be exploited. Gaming is an industry that produces art. The fact is it will not be profitable for a many companies to attempt the risky, untried venture of homosexual... focused (?) games given the size of the potential demographic.

That's exactly the misconception we want to eradicate. Regardless of its debatable benefits on a sociocultural level, the con is immensely beneficial on an economical level. We are a financially tempting demographic, and it's time we showed the gaming industry that.

I would like to see a homosexual protagonist (as in a 100% homosexual, not an optional like Shepard or Hawke, though good on Bioware for really making grounds in AAA titles by including openly homosexual characters who are people are not just their sexuality), I just don't know if any company is willing to risk the launch of such a title.

I guess the convention will prove that an indie developer could start up homosexual focused games or games with homosexual protagonists and there's a market ripe, demanding and willing to be exploited.

It has already happened [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/obscurasoft/coming-out-on-top-a-gay-dating-sim-video-game]. The artist taught herself to code and it's a very simplistic dating sim/visual novel (it's got even less gameplay than The Walking Dead), but she has made about 28,000 dollars (thus far, she still has 12 more days to go). This is how big of a market there are for LGBT-centric games.

I want to stress that she's an artist, not a game developer, and her game is being sold despite its gameplay simplicity. If an actual, proper game were to be made, it would rake in a lot more. This woman, with minimal advertising, got almost 6 times the funding she needed to make a game on her own.

The LGBT demographic is commercially viable, but people are never going to realise that without tangible proof.