On Gaymers and Cons

[harmypants]

Bethesda does an amazing job with Arcade Gannon, and even Mass Effect did it. Mass Effect kind of made it into too big of an issue though and it turned into a stupid conversation about making everyone in every game gay, which is obviously retarded.

Mass Effect was absolutely ridiculous in that regard.

Gaymer is an unnecessary and stupid term, and I believe its existence is making things worse for the average gay man.

You guys can have the last words, but I'd like to state for the record that I love everyone and want to live in a peaceful world where all races and genders can get along.

It's not about acceptance, it's about integration. The whole idea of this proposed con has nothing at all to do with actual sexuality, it's just to deal with how people use sexuality to define themselves and their products, which in this case are games. It's about allowing 'gaymers' (a term I don't particularly care for, but at least it makes a point) somewhere that they feel integrated and respected, not just tolerated.

Games have always been about 'wanting to be that guy' or 'wanting to bang lara croft' with little middle ground. Very few games actually have respectable gay/lesbian/whatever characters, and games involving these ideas are often terribly done, like mass effect, or induce stupid stereotypes, like ballad of gay tony, in which the straight protagonist has sex in the first mission and works for a fairly overtly gay night club owner.

Games are quite ridiculous in regards to sexuality, but in all honesty people are too.

You guys can have the last words

Stop doing this, everyone. "You guys/if you're not LGBT/whatever else" is not helping anyone else.

 

[Darken12]

Stop doing this, everyone. "You guys/if you're not LGBT/whatever else" is not helping anyone else.

It very much helps. It prevents LGBT issues, discussions and events from being overwhelmed and suppressed by people who have no idea what they're talking about. If an LGBT person comes here and sees nothing but a bunch of ignorant straight people saying "This is unfair and segregationist! This is the problem with the LGBT community! This doesn't help equality!" and so on, and they don't see other LGBT people fighting this nonsense, it's possible they might end up agreeing with the ignorant straight people or just giving up altogether because they're alone in their opinion or it's just not worth it. And the more we let this sort of thing happen, the less we accomplish.

We need to establish boundaries with straight people. We can't let them trample over every single discussion, no matter how minor it might be.

You can have the last word on the other stuff, but you took both of those quotes out of context.

Go back and read where I said "This never happens." and what I was replying to.

Yes, I said "And then the police is going to look the other way because I started it and the f*g just got what he deserved." You said "This never happens." I provided examples where LGBT people openly stated that it does happen. The police does look the other way. You said "This proves crimes do happen. What an amazing insight!" so you either completely missed the point of my link or I definitely quoted you right.

 

[The Wooster]

I find it very odd that none of these points about "gaming being more important" came up when we discussed GameChurch [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/9091-The-GameChurch].

 

[harmypants]

It very much helps. It prevents LGBT issues, discussions and events from being overwhelmed and suppressed by people who have no idea what they're talking about.

Then draw the line at people who have no idea what they're talking about, rather than straight people. Beyond that it becomes far too great of a generalisation, and implies that you believe the ideas of all LGBT are infallible and correct, which may not be the case. It might even make you appear less credible than you are, and while I don't believe that anything you've said thus far has been out of order and I certainly agree with almost all of it, any generalisations you (or anyone else) has made certainly hasn't sat well with me.

If an LGBT person comes here and sees nothing but a bunch of ignorant straight people saying "This is unfair and segregationist! This is the problem with the LGBT community! This doesn't help equality!" and so on, and they don't see other LGBT people fighting this nonsense, it's possible they might end up agreeing with the ignorant straight people or just giving up altogether because they're alone in their opinion or it's just not worth it. And the more we let this sort of thing happen, the less we accomplish.

We need to establish boundaries with straight people. We can't let them trample over every single discussion, no matter how minor it might be.

What constitutes an ignorant straight person?
In your opinion, can a straight person support you and your beliefs on the issue, even if they can't have had first hand knowledge on the exact same situation you have?

I'd like to think of myself as a non-ignorant straight person, just from simply not being terribly ignorant as a human being. The only reason I'm posting in this thread is because it relates to me through gaming and homosexuality, given that some of my best friends are gay or lesbian. I understand how they've struggled to become the people they are now, and what it means for them. It depresses me to see how they needed to act to 'fit in', when they really shouldn't need to. It also makes me extremely happy to see them in healthy relationships and comfortable with themselves finally, despite me not being able to achieve that in my own life yet.
Regardless, I've been able to see people who've previously been outcast reintegrate completely and find comfort in what they enjoy about themselves and what they enjoy in life. The relation to gaming is relatively similar in that people are happy to tolerate, but not integrate, not fully accept, and not cater towards.

Why not let 'we' be more than just a group of people from the same sexuality? Why not have it simply be a group of like-minded people?

I hope that given this, I can find it possible to discuss things with you, be that in agreeance or otherwise, and have you not simply shut it down because I'm straight and disagreeing with you. If it was as simple as that, well then I wouldn't be posting.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Really? Gay pride and rights groups are not examples of 'segregation' and neither is a convention. Just because you aren't the target audience doesn't mean you're being segregated. Also, as someone who grew up openly gay, don't tell me where gay people may or may not feel out of place. I've been abused on the street for daring to walk holding hands with my girlfriend, so bigotry still exists wherever you are, and by extension, these things could also happen at gaming conventions. If you don't like the idea of Gaymercon, don't go. It's that simple.

I know bigotry exists and I never said it was a form of segregation. What I think is that having a gaming convention where the main audience is based on sexuality is just silly. It has literally nothing to do with anything and it's thrown in there for good measure. I know I'll get bitched out for this but a straight con is equally silly, hence why people are so angry about having scantily clad girls run around at a regular con, and would get called out for being politically incorrect.

 

[Mykal Stype]

Can someone define "Kyriarchy" clearly? I went on wikipedia to look it up, but I didn't really understand. It was like reading jetpack instructions written in Japanese. I've gotten it somewhat from the context of other people's posts, but not completely.

Also, to tack back on to topic, gay conventions like these aren't about sexuality, they're about feeling "normal" for a change. Everywhere you go nearly everyone is straight, and even when it's not being talked about, if you're gay, there's always that lingering feeling that you aren't entirely a part of the group, unless the groups you run with are really odd already. At gay oriented conventions, you get to be normal for a change.
If you're a straight male and have any gay friends, go to a gay bar (bar, not club. Big difference). You have to go with a friend so that you don't get hit on, but you can't go with a straight friend as you would have someone on your side. It doesn't matter how liberal you are, you're going to feel weird, even though no one there will actually talk much or at all about their sexuality. And if you want to feel even weirder and more obvious, if you're white you can go to an Asian market. Don't bring an Asian friend for that one. Same feeling, just more pronounced.

I don't really agree. I'm straight; I've gone to a gay bar with a gay friend. I got hit on by less guys than at a regular rave. I wasn't uncomfortable at all, I just said I that I was straight and I was just out for a night with my friend. They understood and that was that.

Also, in my youth, I frequented Chinatown in Toronto all the time. I actually felt pretty welcome, even though I didn't speak Mandarin or Cantonese and I'm white. Most shopkeepers seemed delighted to share their food and culture with me, I actually got some really good prices on some cool rice scroll paintings. I still have them!

Certainly, it was somewhat of a culture shock. I didn't know what everything was (like those cool cubed coconuts with a straw) but I didn't feel like I was unwanted.

Really? That's cool. It's hard to find people that are good in either situation. I guess I should have said "generally" in the post. Once I sent a friend out to get me some red bean paste, and he came back with nothing. He said that he felt so awkward and confused he didn't know what to do. That's obviously an extreme case though. He didn't get much of the red bean ice cream I made.
I also forgot about one of my friends; every person I know that has gone to a gay bar feels odd about it, but my friend likes to go to gay clubs in purple tights and knows every bartender's name at gay bars within a 50 mile radius, but he's special as he played Rocky in The Rocky Horror Picture Show every weekend for three or more years.

Back on topic, this is getting ridiculous. The conversation just repeats itself each page, being the same question and response each time. As I said, the convention isn't about sexuality as much as normalcy. It feels good to be in the majority once in a while.
I can see how it can be hard to understand it even if you are a good ally of gay people as empathy can't go as far as experience. If you are a straight white male with good mental health nobody thinks they have to treat you special; nobody tries to pass laws about you; you aren't a subject on slow news days; you don't have organizations talking about how bad you are; you don't have to explain anything about yourself; and except for in chick flicks in which every guy is stupid, you aren't a caricature in every media that involves you (seriously, gay guy in movies are almost the equivalent of blackface).
Obviously a lot of people ask seriously why Gaymercon or whatever else exist, but those people actually do go out of their way to learn by asking the question, and usually understand easily. The joke in the comic is about people that ask the question with no intention of actually getting an answer, and when they do get an answer, they ignore it as it isn't part of the narrative that they like. It's similar to people that ask "why is there no White History Month?" It's because every month is White History Month, including Black History Month.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I find it very odd that none of these points about "gaming being more important" came up when we discussed GameChurch [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/9091-The-GameChurch].

Maybe because that was a post about some goofy evangelists who had a booth at a major convention? Saying this as someone who is routinely annoyed by street preachers who stand around shouting at people in front of the library at the university I attend, that's a funny story, but there doesn't seem to be much else to it. The discussion was also all of 100 posts, consisting of people having a chuckle at said funny story, compared to the nearly 500 posts in this one of people debating the issue that you brought up (re: why would gay people want their own convention?) I'm really not seeing the connection here. One comic sets out an argument. The other is an anecdote.

Brilliant piece of click bait, by the way. I doubt most of the people posting in here had even heard of Gaymer con before reading the comic.

 

[Orekoya]

Segregation n. - The action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart. (Merriam-Webster)

I can do this all day.

Continue to prove my point by quoting the dictionary and providing no reasonable explanation for why this is segregation other than saying it is over and over again? Thank you. Please keep it up all day.

EDIT: Everyone keeps saying that the Gaymer's are segregating themselves. This is true.

Thus this is segregation.

So if everyone says it (which they aren't) then it becomes fact? Good to know that reality works that way.

Segregation is when you acknowledge a difference between things and separate one group.

I can't believe you quote the dictionary then proceed to define it in your own words incorrectly. I mean the definition doesn't state anyone has to acknowledge any differences before the act of separating. Also no effort is being made to separate people by the con itself so it doesn't match the real definition or your poor interpretation.

Do you see how that applies to this?

In that you say it applies when it doesn't, yes I can see that.

 

[Darken12]

What constitutes an ignorant straight person?

The ignorant straight person is a straight person who says ignorant things. I've provided abbreviated examples in the post you quoted, but basically you can take a look at most of what the "critics" (and I use that term loosely) of this con have been saying. The ignorant straight person is someone who hasn't made an effort to sympathise or understand what the LGBT community has gone through or continues to go through, and who thoughtlessly spews half-baked and ill-conceived criticisms of something that doesn't affect them, not even bothering to stop and listen to the people who are better informed than them on the matter in question. The ignorant straight person believes that they have a right for their opinion to be heard and considered, without even bothering to tone down the arrogance in their posts.

In your opinion, can a straight person support you and your beliefs on the issue, even if they can't have had first hand knowledge on the exact same situation you have?

Yes, straight allies do exist and I value them greatly, but the straight ally makes a point to be respectful. They don't barge into a discussion spouting their disapproval and aggressively criticising the LGBT community. The straight ally understands that when it comes to LGBT issues, they're guests at another person's house, so to speak, and they should behave with respect and deference, precisely because they do not belong in the conversation.

It's fine to say that you disagree with the ideas behind the con or that you're worried about the impact it may have on equality, but straight allies should approach the conversation with delicacy and respect. It's seriously not that hard. I'm a feminist ally, and I take the utmost care in my talks with feminists to make sure my demeanour comes off as respectful and grateful for their attention, because they have no obligation to indulge me or pay me any sort of attention. They do it out of politeness and the goodness of their hearts, so I consider it an honour I greatly appreciate.

I'd like to think of myself as a non-ignorant straight person, just from simply not being terribly ignorant as a human being. The only reason I'm posting in this thread is because it relates to me through gaming and homosexuality, given that some of my best friends are gay or lesbian. I understand how they've struggled to become the people they are now, and what it means for them. It depresses me to see how they needed to act to 'fit in', when they really shouldn't need to. It also makes me extremely happy to see them in healthy relationships and comfortable with themselves finally, despite me not being able to achieve that in my own life yet.
Regardless, I've been able to see people who've previously been outcast reintegrate completely and find comfort in what they enjoy about themselves and what they enjoy in life. The relation to gaming is relatively similar in that people are happy to tolerate, but not integrate, not fully accept, and not cater towards.

Why not let 'we' be more than just a group of people from the same sexuality? Why not have it simply be a group of like-minded people?

In short? Dilution. Let me put it this way: every nation is a group of people that's more than just those of the same sexuality. In the US, what do we have to show for it? Gay rights are nowhere near acceptable. Why? Because we play nice and we do things the proper way and we take the high road. We don't beat up homophobes, we don't throw molotov cocktails to the houses of intolerant religious or right wing people, we try to get our laws passed in lawful, acceptable ways. We swallow all the rage, the injustice, the humiliation we endure, everything. When things get too rough, what's the worst thing we do? We kill ourselves.

And what do we have to show for it? Slow, gruelling progress, where we have to fight for every damn inch, accompanied by the increase of hate crimes.

So no, I'm sorry. Allies can support and help, but we need a safe place where we can get together and support each other, and where our voices can be heard instead of drowned by a cacophony of people who aren't part of our community, somewhere where our needs and wants matter, and aren't pushed away because we're a minority and nobody cares about us. The more straight people invade our safe spaces, the more alone and separated we are from each other, and the more drowned out we get. If straight people want to be our allies, they need to give us our space, and start acting like they are guests at our house, instead of stomping all over the place.

I hope that given this, I can find it possible to discuss things with you, be that in agreeance or otherwise, and have you not simply shut it down because I'm straight and disagreeing with you. If it was as simple as that, well then I wouldn't be posting.

I don't mind discussing things with you, because you approach the subject respectfully (for what I've seen). My problem isn't with all straight people, it's with those who can't be bothered to be respectful with their criticism and can't even accept that maybe the LGBT community knows more about what it's like to be LGBT than them.

 

[theultimateend]

Dear Mr Carter I would like it if you would NOT use such comments such as the following "steeped in that luxurious ignorance particular to white teenagers".
As I am a white teenager myself I feel offended that you would use a negative stereotype to insult us while then trying to breed understanding and tolerance as you are undermining your own message by doing so (insulting said people who ask said questions when you your self said it is simply because they are ignorant) also does not help your cause and simply anger people.
Your's truly the wonderful all knowing and kind leader of the human race known as knight steel ^_^

Seeing as nearly all my homophobic friends aren't white I agree on some level.

It's very easy to blame white people for being unambiguously hateful but it kinda ignores reality.

Edit: Literally just did a headcount and all my homophobic friends are Asian.

The only person in my life that is white and homophobic is my half brother.

Now everyone here knows more about my social circle than they cared to.

double edit: Might be unfair though since I grew up in Bremerton right next to Bangor. So a disproportionate amount of the people I have known in my life have been Asian. I'm sure if I was somewhere with a different demographic the majority in that region would be the one with homophobes.

Basically its just a small % of a population and if the population is big in an area they'll seem like the predominantly less open minded group.

 

[Seneschal]

I find it very odd that none of these points about "gaming being more important" came up when we discussed GameChurch [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/9091-The-GameChurch].

Yeah, it's weird. There wasn't anyone accusing them of "trying to segregate Christgamers from Atheistgamers." Maybe a few people found it weird, but there weren't several opposing comments on the first page alone.

Perhaps it was their delivery - all goofy and playful... It assured (or fooled) those that "didn't see the need for a Gamechurch" that they were just fooling around, that it would be all about the games and the beer, bro, and that Jesus was just a mascot. Or people simply weren't weirded out by Christian gamers wanting to gather and discuss issues that pertain to both faith and games.

I don't get why Gaymercon gets the opposite reaction. It's like, "What are you guys talking about there? Stop that! Gaming has nothing to do with LGBTQ issues. I don't care about your extensive list of panels, events and open forums; you come back to E3 immediately!"

Geez.

 

[Radley Duder]

Just thought I'd pop in and have my say. I read a few of the comments back there, but not all of them (you understand, right? We all have better things to do than to read this whole damn thing.) I'm not here to debate or argue here, never was any good at that. The reason I'm excited for GaymerX is because there's a place for me to act and interact with like-minded people. I recently came out as pansexual September last year. My group of friends were supportive and didn't really draw much attention to the whole thing ( other than the common question of "what's a pansexual?") but when we hung out later on, the way they'd react to things made me a bit uncomfortable, from calling things gay or faggy, to something as small as saying "ew" in reaction to the thought of a gay Shepard, to laughing when one of the characters in a show turns out to be gay (depending on the context, this last point is totally fine, but in this case, it wasn't). I don't really fault them for those latter reactions to things, but it makes me a tad uncomfortable. I'd like to go to a place where I can be comfortable with my sexuality, so I occasionally drop by an LGBT meetup in town. I'm also a gamer, so I head over to our video game themed bar, and go to conventions like pax and such. The idea of combining the two, especially with the video game industry which has some image issues concerning homophobia and all that, sounds like a ton of fun! Will I stop going to the other conventions? Of course not, PAX is awesome, but the idea of going to a convention that celebrates a hobby that has become a part of my life, and doesn't alienate in small ways the way some marketing and a portion of the general gaming demographic does, sounds like a blast.

 

[Darken12]

I'll start off by saying that it's well written. I don't really agree with you, but your point comes across nicely.

In these situations though, it's often that some people fight a little *too* hard for their rights and come off as self pitying or crusaders.

Thanks. The thing is, at the end of the day, we're in it together and I still got your back even if I rabidly disagree with you.

I'll quote the con's webpage:

"Educating and informing the gaming community of the presence and importance of sexuality and gender diversity in our digital lives and promoting acceptance and social change through bettering the gaming experience."

Before that it states:

"Gaymer X is open to all, whether you?re bisexual, transgender, gay, asexual or an ally and we hope to make an experience that will be meaningful as well as educational and fascinating."

Open to all. Except, y'know, the people who need to be informed about the situation.
Excluding the target audience is not educational or tolerance promotional; it's borderline stupid.

You cannot educate people who don't want to be educated. Educating someone against their will, even with good intentions, is called brainwashing. We cannot force unreceptive straight people to listen to us.

Non-related people are well within their rights to ask questions about this con. They should be respectful, of course, but there's no reason to show any special curtesy or treat us like victims. If we want to have a sober debate, we need to show that we're able to behave maturely, that we're PEOPLE like everyone else.

Whenever someone has asked an honest question and not a rhetorical one meant to express disapproval or reproach at the idea, I've answered it to the best of my abilities. Nobody said anything about being treated like victims. You don't treat the owners of the house like a victim simply because you're expected to observe proper decorum while you're under someone else's roof, do you?

Here in DK our LGBT organization doesn't self promote as weak or act as if we can't take care of ourselves in any way. They've just started to organize workshops for LGBTs in Tanzania where people get lifetime imprisonment for homosexuality. They promote tolerance and rights where there are NONE.
Now, I'm not saying the US is a safe zone and completely tolerant or that growing up in a relatively peaceful society as an LGBT is always easy, but to say that you have slow grueling progress is not true mate. Several states in your country allowed same-sex marriage before ours did and your country is quickly progressing, teaching kids about equality and tolerance, now more than ever.

In the last fifty years we've seen more progress than we have in several hundreds. That might be slow and grueling to you, but in the big picture we're doing pretty well.

It's relative. Sure, we're better than we've been in the past, but we're still far from this utopia of equality some straight people seem to be convinced we live in.

As for ignorant straight people... I think you're being too sensitive. I would rather take an ally that questions my actions and decisions bluntly, than have them walk on eggshells and be ultra sensitive to my "situation".

And I would rather have an ally that lets me make my own decisions and doesn't demand that his opinion be heard on every little thing my friends and I want to do, and who doesn't try to educate me on what furthers or hinders equality. But I guess it's a matter of personal taste.

Maybe we should coin the phrase "ignorant LGBT". People who think no one else has a hard time and that they can't relate to intolerance unless they're in a minority.
A crass point, but I hope you take my jab as it's meant.

Cute. Adorable, even. Especially when I've posted about the kyriarchy on this thread over and over, repeatedly acknowledging that most of us are oppressed one way or another, and that most of us know what it means to be discriminated against. Plus I've said it a few times by know, privilege doesn't mean that your life is automatically good. However, the cold hard facts are that the LGBT community is the expert when it comes to knowing what being LGBT is. And that's something straight people aren't. Now I don't know about you, but when I;m having a discussion with my college professors, I make sure I keep in mind that they probably know a great deal more than I do on the subject, and that they deserve respect.

 

[Guestyman]

Can I just say that this is entirely too ridiculous that the thread has gone on for as long as it has?

This entire discussion can boil down to the following:

Gay gamers want their own little sandbox, so they made one. With their own money. Who on Earth are you to say they can't have it?

When you boil it down like that it seems rather simple, doesn't it? If you don't like the idea of Gaymercon then don't go. But just because there exists a place on earth where you are not the target audience does not give you any rights over it. And if the outcomes of the discussion don't effect you, then you have NO PLACE in the discussion.

End of story.

Seriously this is getting ridiculous. This thread has over 460 replies and you wonder why we feel like we're sick of being controversial and want to be the normal ones for a change?

Let me make an analogy.

It's like if you have some siblings and between you and your siblings you own a toy. I'm your best friend from school and we often play with your toy, but sometimes your big brother is a massive jerk to me, and sometimes I just like to play with my brother instead so I buy myself a toy that's similar to your toy, but mine is a different colour that me and my little brother like more but you don't.

I don't stop coming 'round to play with you, I just play with my little brother as well. Then you come 'round to my house and start getting offended by me owning my own toy. "I always let you play with mine! What's wrong with my toy?" you ask. And the answer is nothing. Nothing is wrong with your toy. The fact that you always let me borrow/play with your toy doesn't mean I can't have my own. And if I buy my own, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with yours. I might like the colour of mine better, or not want to play with your jerk of a brother. You're still my best friend, and we'll still hang out. Me having other friends and other toys doesn't mean I'm going to stop being your best friend, and I find it stupid that you think we're going to segregate myself in my room just because I spend some time there.

This is a ridiculous argument to be having.

Just let me have my toy.

 

[taciturnCandid]

I'd like to link to something i read quite a while ago.

http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/gamer_152/in-defence-of-gaymercon/30-95516/


Basically, LGBT cons are quite important for the development of the industry.

The gaming industry focuses on the straight male so much. So much is set around sexual arousal and fantasies of straight males that other gamers are left out. Women often feel out of place with few characters to sympathize with and there are very few lgbt characters that are portrayed in a positive light.

A LGBT convention shows the game industry that we exist and that there is a market to cater to outside the straight male.

 

[Whateveralot]

If neutral cons aren't gay enough for gay people in the gaming community, I feel it is my right to demand for a straight con, because saying that neutral Cons are straight enough for us straight people is insensitive and discrimination.

 

[JemothSkarii]

Okay, let me state off the bat that I'm not against an LGBT kind of gamer convention if they want one. But why, when searching for equality would you chose to make a convention made for LGBT community? Sure, while there may be undertones of heterosexual-ness in them, they are certainly NOT just for heteros...

Do I sound like a misinformed bigot? Probably, I've developed a thick skin. A few, or even a lot of you probably know I'm a disabled person. It doesn't affect my speech or my mind, but my walking is horrendous. I need a waking frame for long distances outside, and my walking gait without it is very obvious without it. I have been bullied for it, left out, called names, everything under the sun for it.
For the longest time I thought I was bisexual.
Now this mixed with where you grew up or live are factors for my answers, and applied to each and every one of you, it would be the truth.
The gay people that I know have been arrogant entitled twats or confused fools that don't know what they want. For example, I had a gay best friend who eventually fell for me. I turned him down when he confessed to me since I had a girlfriend, and for weeks he would bring up how miserable he was over the whole thing and how badly he wanted to be with me. Eventually he ran away with my girlfriend at the time, and after her breaking up with him, he still calls himself gay.

How does this fit in?
I grew up where name calling (such as ****** and gay) means nothing. Strange looks, being treated different, in my world that is something I've had to live with. Sure, there are groups for disabled people, but I never feel comfortable in them, I don't like being singled out, I like to retain my 'normal cis scumness' or however much I have. This is why I don't understand such a need for one aimed at them, when something like the PlayStation Move or Kinect are unusable to me, and that some gameplay mechanics make games much more difficult to me (like rapidly tapping two buttons alternatively).
But who knows? Maybe I 'm bitter and hold a bias, I can't be the only one.

 

[NoeL]

snip

Just wanted to say that out of everyone here I feel you've nailed the reality of the situation the best. So thanks for that.

As for my own two cents, I'm in favour of specialised gaming cons since it offers both a different perspective on the medium and an opportunity for people to hang out with people whose interests are more aligned with their own. I very much understand the "why would they want to?" question because most people view sexuality as such an irrelevant and trivial issue that doesn't deserve the focus, as a "straight" game convention and a "gay" game convention would be identical in their eyes. I think the LGBT community should be ECSTATIC that this question is being asked so often, because it shows just how many people don't see this us-vs-them picture when it comes to sexuality. It reminds me of that episode of South Park where the town was debating on whether or not to change the flag, which depicted some white men hanging a black man. When the kids were asked about it they didn't understand why people found the flag so offensive, as death is a natural and common aspect of life. The issue of race didn't even occur to them.

EDIT: It's like people are saying "Why would blacks even want a Negro league?"

I also very much understand the want for such a con, as those "ignorant white teenagers" that don't think twice about someone's sexuality would obviously have thought very little about what it's like to be LGBT and in what ways the world is different for them. Like Smilomaniac said, THEY are the ones that need the education yet are ironically not part of this convention's target audience. But even if they're not sincere about education and just want to put on a good show that LGBT folks might enjoy more than a regular con, let them go nuts!

 

[Darken12]

That's not really my point. I agree, you can't teach those who don't want to learn, but non-allies and LGBT aren't all like that, obviously. This con should be a gate to non LGBT gamers who can meet us on common grounds, at least if the education part of it is sincere. It's a nice opportunity to engage others, but it seems very much like a closed event.

The purpose of the con is for LGBT gamers to have a place to meet. The education bit is a statement of intent, one that is secondary to providing the LGBT community a safe place to get together and talk about games. Everything you're saying is contemplated, and straight people are allowed to go and educate themselves, but it's not a primarily educative con. It's not about straight people and I frankly don't think it should be about straight people. Again, it's supposed to be about LGBT people having a gamer con, not about educating straight people. We already have programs and initiatives for that.

I'd expect a lot of dumb questions if I invited ignorant guests over, to teach them about my group. That's the point.
As for disrespect, that's not exclusive to LGBTs or minorities. We deal with it like everyone else.
I hope you know that I don't mean that you're acting like a victim, just that this is something that some do, despite having no idea of what a victim is.

I have no problems with dumb questions. I have a problem with dumb questions wrapped in a package of arrogance and disrespect.

I know about victim mentality and learned helplessness. I know it's a thing that happens. Even if I thought a fellow LGBT person was suffering from such a state, I would still support their decisions because they're mature adults who ought to be given freedom of choice first and foremost.

It's not relative, it's fact. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history#2010s]
We're a LOT better off than all the generations behind us and we're helping the next ones have it better still.
The only kind of utopian description I've heard of is a friend who told me "It must be nice to get turned on by anyone and double your chances". It's an innocent comment, if a bit shortsighted

Still, I can't blame some straight/"normal" people for being tired of hearing minorities whinge. There are definitely some people in our midst who don't know when to shut up and take a look at the bigger picture.

You misunderstand. When I say it's relative, I meant that there is no objective measurement that we can use to determine when we've progressed enough or reached the threshold of equality. I'm not denying our progress, I'm saying that we're not at the level a lot of straight people think we are. They think that just because we've progressed to a certain point, we should stop fighting and shut up because we're annoying them (while we, of course, get labelled as overreactive oversensitive activists for saying that they should shut up when they say something offensive).

I mean, look at this whole thing: some LGBT people thought it would be a good idea to have their own con (which is something that, again, harms nobody, and they have every right to do if they feel like it), and straight people started being smarmy asses (as illustrated by the comic), and then everyone just exploded because they felt they had every right to be smarmy asses! There was genuine curiosity by some posters, yes, but this was started by the straight community reacting to something that didn't concern them, wasn't harming anybody, affected them in no way, and then getting pissy when this was pointed out.

We all need eachother to grow. If we don't broaden our horizons with input, we can't learn or learn the sympathy that we want from others, assuming we don't just end up and congregate for ourselves.
An ignorant is a potential ally, so if he or she is willing to listen, then we should oblige them, especially if they have a genuine question, no matter how stupid it is.
If it's just someone barking for attention, we ignore them, as always.

I couldn't possibly disagree more. This learning that you speak of is not an imperative, it's a choice. We broaden our horizons because we want to, not because we must, and we do it on our own terms. This goes for straight people too and ties to what I said before. You cannot force education upon people. They have to want it, and you give it to them in their own terms.

And like I said, when someone has asked genuine questions, I've done my best to answer. Some questions are rhetorical, though, and they're instead used to disparage, disapprove of, or insult snidely.

I'm not sure we're aligned on this point. Take your example on your feminist friends that you mentioned earlier, my impression is that you're way beyond respectful or maybe you're over describing your interaction with them.
I'm friends with two feminists, but in the over-entitled femi-nazi meaning of the word, not the almost forgotten true gender-equality front fighter kind. They want equality while keeping their special status. Whenever we hit the subject, I flatten them out every single time, because they're being total bitches about it
If I approached them in a completely sober/respectful and objective tone and calmly discussed the subject with them, without "imposing" my opinions on them, they wouldn't learn anything, because I'd be forced to stop every time they were offended. They seem to get it, most of the time, that they have a skewed view on feminism, but they seem to forget it until the next time they're butthurt over something.

And what makes you think you're right and they're being unreasonable? Maybe it's my relativistic morality at work, but I live on the assumption that nobody's right or wrong. We all have our opinions and life philosophies, and we all believe in them with absolute fervour. I think that women (and especially feminists) know more about women issues than I do, and so they deserve to be treated like the authorities on the subject that they are.

I don't think I am entitled to have an opinion on whether their view of feminism is skewed or not, because it's none of my business. I wouldn't want them to criticise me on my views on LGBT issues, so out of courtesy and the Golden Rule, I don't do that to them. Likewise, I keep my mouth shut on race issues, because I am quite aware of my own ignorance on the matter and I would rather keep my opinions to myself than inadvertently offend a person of colour with a thoughtless remark. Besides, I know my opinions on racial matters are irrelevant, so I am aware that keeping them to myself is no great loss.

MY POINT is that I learn something new often, and that whenever I feel upset or agitated over something LGBT related, there's a friend to take me down a notch and remind me that I'm really not that bad off or that I'm being a *****.
If you can get on without those kinds of friends or any input from the outside, then you are most certainly a better man than most. But I can't use the kind of ally you describe, because they'd be useless to me, just another bobblehead nod-doll that isn't allowed to disagree.

And likewise, I already have the rest of the world to confront me on a daily basis and challenge my opinions, actions and decisions. A bobblehead nod-doll would be a welcome change.

I can't comment on the state of kyriarchy, you're obviously more knowledgable on sociology than I am
I don't get the context.

Of the kyriarchy? I have a post on that:

"The origin of kyriarchy comes from feminism, who started using the term 'patriarchy' to talk about how society has historically placed power on men and oppressed women. As issues of race, sexuality, class and the like began to rise in prominence, the feminists coined the term kyriarchy to define the system that connects all forms of society oppression. Kyriarchy is like the patriarchy in the sense that it's an institutionalised form of oppression, only instead of oppressing only women, the kyriarchy oppresses women, people of colour, LGBT people, the disabled, the lower classes and so on. Kyriarchy means "rule of the master", though a better definition would be, perhaps, "rule of dominance". The kyriarchy is a stroke of evil genius, if you think about it, because it not only keeps a large portion of the populace oppressed (much like in times of peasantry vs. aristocracy), but it also ensures that the oppressed keep oppressing each other, so that there isn't a single enemy they can unite against. Under the kyriarchy, a straight black man oppresses a gay white man, who oppresses a straight white woman, who oppresses a straight black woman, who oppresses a straight white man of lower class, who oppresses the straight black man from the beginning. It's an interlocking network of oppression who keeps us all fighting each other and preserving the status quo that only benefits a very small percentage of the population (the age-old aristocracy under another name)."

As for your final analogy, that really hits home on my point that our situation is not so special that we need to be treated with respect, just because we're part of a group, one that's(mostly) based on sexual orientation.
Not everyone in it has been subjected to discrimination and certainly not everyone fighting for its rights have either.

...besides, professors and teachers who treat their students as idiots, deserve no respect at all. No matter how knowledgable they are.

Everyone deserves respect, particularly in their area of expertise. I frankly disagree with you on your take on LGBT issues and the LGBT community. I would rather be a team player and stick to my people, regardless of how much I disagreed with them (case in point: I am not entirely convinced I support the con, but look at me fiercely defending it from straight people) because I'm not so self-centred as to think my individual views are more important than the problems of LGBT community. To me, it's more important to form a unified front and stand together than it is to squabble between ourselves.

But I respect that you feel differently and I won't try to change your mind. I'm just explaining to you why I can't agree with you or see it your way. It's a moral thing.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Don't be that guy.

Isn't it the Falun Gong that the Chinese are concerned about?