EA joins Sony in call for inclusivity

[Rozalia1]

21 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Yes, yes, we get it, you like your masturbatory right wing civility. Your OP isn't "neutral", it's just garbage. You link three articles, and do not bother so much as to summarize what they're about because you apparently think whining about the contents of said articles is more important than putting the smallest amount of effort into actually explaining what you're making a topic about.

 

But then, let's be honest - that is what this topic was intended to be about - you whining. The articles are just foreplay.

 

 

Let's be honest, none of these people ever actually supported marginalized people. They just like saying they did so that they can revoke their imaginary support every time they decide to whip out the prejudice of the day.

 

I'll admit that two of the sources juicing up their articles by using Trans threw me off providing more of a summery, though I doubt for your talk you would ever accept a summery from me as fair.

 

Whining must have some definition I don't know.

 

Or they did and this sort of hostility at foibles on their part caused them to throw their hands up and give up. People aren't saints and should not be expected to reward bad behaviour towards them.

 

23 minutes ago, Doucet-182 said:

Yeah i got heated up for sure and need to chill.

 

It just fucks me up when we're in 2022 and we're still out here "debating" LGBT shit 

 

People have a greater issue with the overzealous activism more than anything. I would try and remember that.

 

11 minutes ago, Alos88 said:

 'If you aren't with me you're against me' is a mentality that often pushes fence-sitters onto the other side of the fence.

 

Accurate. There are two choices with "fence sitters". Attempt to calmly convince them to your side or... angrily push them off the fence and on to the other side. 

 

8 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

You're not a fence sitter, you just have delusions of decency.

 

"I keep smearing people as being bad, why won't they come to my side?"

 

Have you never heard that you get more flies with honey than with vinegar?

 

2 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Obviously that's an extreme example, played for laughs...

... but my point was that that game would never be created in a climate where anyone expected the audience of games to be anything but White Men.

 

And while I'm not indifferent to the point you were making, I do think it's pretty ridiculous to suggest games 40 years ago were aimed at anything but white men, since we know fine well that they made up such a massive block of the demographic at that point, as to render virtually all other demographics within that audience statistically obsolete.

 

I say that as one of them.

 

Whether you can identify specific elements of individual games from back then that were specifically aimed at while males is irrelevant - virtually the whole audience was white and male at that point, and so by definition all games were aimed at white men.

 

The point isn't that that was bad - industries have to cater to their audience - but that status quo in terms of product manufacture actually outlasted its term as a commercial reality by quite some margin. There was a fairly long period of time where more and more other demographics were entering the market for games, but the industry simply wasn't acknowledging them, or catering to them in the mainstream - only around the fringes - and in the case of gay / transgender, the very extreme fringes.

 

It's the quick-snap back to reality as that bubble burst, and suddenly the whole commercial audience is getting a slice of the pie that seems to have given some of the old-guard whiplash. That whiplash is understandable to a certain extent - change can be jarring, even to those not particularly bigoted against it - but it also seems to have blinded them a little. 

Most still seem to fail to acknowledge that even now, the dominant playable character in videogames is the straight white male.

It just isn't the only playable character now.

 

Gaming has heavily featured Japanese companies, who at one point were completely dominant. To claim that gaming was aimed at men is one thing, to try and make this a White man specifically thing is odd.

[Alos88]

Just now, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Finally, something we can agree on. I do not care whether or not you make assumptions about me. Most likely, you already have. If you believe marginalized people wanting the bare minimum of respect is enough to push the ~poor, innocent fence sitters~ into bigotry, that tells me more than I need to know about you.

 

I haven't. You feel how you feel and that's fine. Attacking me because you think I might be an enemy based on a series of vague, brief statements... well, that's closer in my eyes to delusion than anything I've said. 

Maybe instead of attacking everyone who may or may not disagree with you, you should take a moment and wonder how you could get your arguments across without resorting to emotional ad hominem- because insults are a sign you've run out points to make.

I'm not a fence sitter, as an aside. I just don't detest them either. I'd sooner spend time thinking of ways to convince them without attacks than do it your way, that's all.

[madbuk]

1 minute ago, Alayaes said:

What political themes does Pac-Man have? Perhaps I can agree that it has a political allegory? I don't recall Pac-Man reciting to me how to configure my moral compass, what side of history was objectively better than the other, nor were the developers tweeting me about what to stand for or believe in.

It could quite easily be considered a commentary on capitalism, how Pac-Man is the sole person consuming all the wealth in the maze whilst eating the poor ghosts in the process. And the ghosts respawn and he does it again, the rich continues to get richer by preying on those beneath him and only he is able to collect any of it at all.

[Zephrese]

6 minutes ago, czDante92 said:

For such self-claimed "tolerant" people they're always fastest to attack other people if their world views don't 100% align.

 

i hate everyone equally and am in no way tolerant to anyone idk what you're talking about dante old pal

[shipper321]

Just now, madbuk said:

It could quite easily be considered a commentary on capitalism, how Pac-Man is the sole person consuming all the wealth in the maze whilst eating the poor ghosts in the process. And the ghosts respawn and he does it again, the rich continues to get richer by preying on those beneath him and only he is able to collect any of it at all.

[SOYJAK IMAGE GOES HERE]

No one actually thinks this unironically, or at least, I hope they don't.

[Darling Baphomet]

9 minutes ago, czDante92 said:

If government, media, corporations, Hollywood celebrities and major universities are supporting you, are you really oppressed? Or is Cletus, Prudence and Kyle the high school bully such a threat that everybody must unite under rainbow flag?

 

I'll make sure to tell the next trans person I meet who's struggling with homelessness because their parents disowned them that they're not oppressed because a Disney movie has five minutes of shitty representation in it.

 

And what the fuck do you call state governments forcibly detransitioning trans people (even trans adults) and taking away trans children from their parents?

 

Just now, Alos88 said:

I haven't. You feel how you feel and that's fine. Attacking me because you think I might be an enemy based on a series of vague, brief statements... well, that's closer in my eyes to delusion than anything I've said. 

 

Yes, yes, you're not my enemy, you're just curiously fixated with defending my enemies from criticism.

 

Reminds me of a person I once knew who spent years trying to 'gently re-educate' an online Nazi, which not only produced no results whatsoever but resulted in her performing her own little bigotries like telling a black person said Nazi had repeatedly used slurs against (to say nothing of the shit they said about black people as a whole) that she should just try being polite and talking it out.

[objectioner]

1 minute ago, Alayaes said:

What political themes does Pac-Man have? Perhaps I can agree that it has a political allegory? I don't recall Pac-Man reciting to me how to configure my moral compass, what side of history was objectively better than the other, nor were the developers tweeting me about what to stand for or believe in.

 

Clearly Pac-Man is an evil imperialist who is invading the homeland of the indigenous ghost people?

 

Jokes aside, it irritates me when people keep saying "everything is political, mainly because people keep conflating "political themes" with "political messaging".

 

The former presents you with political ideas and lets you make up your mind about it.

 

The latter tells you how/what to think.

 

[Alayaes]

1 minute ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Okay but what is it you want to escape from? Other people's struggles?

 

Consider that the marginalized people you claim allyship towards not only do not get to take breaks from the injustice that permeates their lives, but on top of that they can't even find safety and representation in their escapism, and when they do ask for such they get accused of grooming children or whatever the fuck else.

Yes, yes I do. And my own. I don't want to be reminded constantly of the struggles of a certain group. It's mentally unhealthy and can lead to depression.

 

And when you're done worrying about the struggles of the LGBT, you can then worry about the struggle of the homeless. Then you can worry about the hungry children. Then you can worry about health care. Then you can worry about sexual assaults in religious institutions. And that is all before you reach abroad outside of the United States, where an entire world of injustice awaits you. At one point you have to select what you pour energy into and what you don't. That doesn't mean you support the oppressor. It means you'll take a stance when confronted, but other than that you're not on a permanent crusade. Or maybe you just don't think it's that simple and you choose to evaluate each situation individually due to the complex nature of things?

 

Also, these companies that we're discussing don't give a rat's ass about any of these issues because they don't have the time or energy. They're just checking off boxes on this list of social issues so certain groups of people won't boycott their sales.

 

As much as your statement comes across as a bit sensational, I am absolutely not against them having representation in their escapism. I fully support that. That is just one subject within a spectrum of thousands. I'm sure we'll agree on the majority but have differences in opinions in regards to some subjects. The problem lies in the absolute invalidation of my entire person unless I agree with every single thing. In fact, me being an "ally" is subtly challenged by the way you word things. As if I can't be an ally unless I agree with everything you deem true, false, right, and wrong?

[DrBloodmoney]

2 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

Gaming has heavily featured Japanese companies, who at one point were completely dominant. To claim that gaming was aimed at men is one thing, to try and make this a White man specifically thing is odd.

 

I'm not sure why you would bring that up, as if my point about demographics would somehow be punctured if I said "White and Asian Men" 

 

I mean - fair enough, point conceded I suppose, Japanese men made up a large portion of what I colloquially referred to as "White Men" but from a demographic and socio-political view standpoint, does that really make a difference?

My point (which is hardly inflammatory in any way, to either side) remains the same 

 

[Slava]

16 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

Having a war within the company between a split workforce who demands the other side get fired for being evil is bad for business yes. Workers are free to promote their beliefs outside the workplace. Is this outrageous?

 

Did that happen at Bungie and Insomniac or other studios known for making statements about this? I haven't seen.

 

As for in or outside of work, sure. Although, wouldn't Twitter crowd keep track of who said what online anyway? 

[Breakingthegreen]

8 minutes ago, Alayaes said:

What political themes does Pac-Man have? Perhaps I can agree that it has a political allegory? I don't recall Pac-Man reciting to me how to configure my moral compass, what side of history was objectively better than the other, nor were the developers tweeting me about what to stand for or believe in.

I'd say how Pac-Man is considered male, despite being a complete blank slate, no face, no features, there is no conceivable gender. But male is considered the default, so he became Pac-man. More of a Meta theme, I realise, but it's there.

[Alayaes]

5 minutes ago, madbuk said:

It could quite easily be considered a commentary on capitalism, how Pac-Man is the sole person consuming all the wealth in the maze whilst eating the poor ghosts in the process. And the ghosts respawn and he does it again, the rich continues to get richer by preying on those beneath him and only he is able to collect any of it at all.

Okay, come on now. That's an allegory. Not messaging.

 

Super Mario is about the oppression of the middle class via the uptick in plumbing costs, represented by Mario and Luigi jumping on top of the citizens of the mushroom kingdom and turning them into coins/money to line their pockets with.

[TheArcadeKid]

2 minutes ago, madbuk said:

It could quite easily be considered a commentary on capitalism, how Pac-Man is the sole person consuming all the wealth in the maze whilst eating the poor ghosts in the process. And the ghosts respawn and he does it again, the rich continues to get richer by preying on those beneath him and only he is able to collect any of it at all.

In the nicest possible way, this sounds like satire.

 

In any case, it's also a political interpretation, which is a nuance I think most people forget when they insist "all art is political." All art is not political and never has been - you've just chosen to interpret it that way.

[Alos88]

1 minute ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

 

 

Yes, yes, you're not my enemy, you're just curiously fixated with defending my enemies from criticism.

 

Reminds me of a person I once knew who spent years trying to 'gently re-educate' an online Nazi, which not only produced no results whatsoever but resulted in her performing her own little bigotries like telling a black person said Nazi had repeatedly used slurs against (to say nothing of the shit they said about black people as a whole) that she should just try being polite and talking it out.

So I'm a Nazi now, or some equivalent in your eyes? Have you considered how appallingly offensive that could come across to a person of Jewish descent? Or are you content to move the goalposts as you please as long as you can convince yourself you've maintained the moral highground?
I'm sorry, but I can't continue this conversation in good faith (not that you'd ever have believed I was acting in it to begin with) when you've resorted to such a thoughtless, hurtful statement. I have defended no one but myself- and you've done nothing in your posts but attack me in turn. But I'm afraid that for me you've crossed a line here, and I'll leave you to your thoughts.
Good day.

[objectioner]

2 minutes ago, TheArcadeKid said:

 

In any case, it's also a political interpretation, which is a nuance I think most people forget when they insist "all art is political." All art is not political and never has been - you've just chosen to interpret it that way.

This is spot on, I hope you don't mind me stealing this for when I next have a debate with friends.

[Zephrese]

11 minutes ago, Alayaes said:

As much as your statement comes across as a bit sensational, I am absolutely not against them having representation in their escapism. I fully support that. That is just one subject within a spectrum of thousands. I'm sure we'll agree on the majority but have differences in opinions in regards to some subjects. The problem lies in the absolute invalidation of my entire person unless I agree with every single thing. In fact, me being an "ally" is subtly challenged by the way you word things. As if I can't be an ally unless I agree with everything you deem true, false, right, and wrong?

 

I can't like/upvote this post because I ran out of my daily bag of 'em, but I greatly appreciate you and what you've said here (and in this thread in general).

 

Thank you for being levelheaded and polite! ?

Edited May 26, 2022 by Zephrese

[BrandedBerserk]

40 minutes ago, KimmysGotGame said:

Friendly reminder that staying neutral in the face of oppression only favors the oppressor.

 

I'm sorry but what oppression exactly?

 

People need to stop with all these imaginary battles they got going on in their heads and live some more if you think you're oppressed living in a free country with opportunities that the less unfortunate would die for. 

Edited May 26, 2022 by BrandedBerserk

[Darling Baphomet]

Just now, Alayaes said:

Yes, yes I do. And my own. I don't want to be reminded constantly of the struggles of a certain group. It's mentally unhealthy and can lead to depression.

 

Now consider how much more mentally unhealthy it is to actually have to deal with that shit full time.

 

1 minute ago, Alayaes said:

And when you're done worrying about the struggles of the LGBT, you can then worry about the struggle of the homeless. Then you can worry about the hungry children. Then you can worry about health care. Then you can worry about sexual assaults in religious institutions.

 

Yes, I'm queer, I've been homeless, I struggle with (and often fail) affording healthcare, and I've faced severe (non-sexual) abuse by christians. Do you have a point except that the realities of people such as myself are mere distant hypotheticals to you?

 

4 minutes ago, Alayaes said:

That doesn't mean you support the oppressor. It means you'll take a stance when confronted, but other than that you're not on a permanent crusade. Or maybe you just don't think it's that simple and you choose to evaluate each situation individually due to the complex nature of things?

 

Perhaps not, however it is one thing to simply take breaks for the sake of your mental health, and it is another thing entirely to berate marginalized people talking about their issues because they're not doing it right. Which is what you've been doing in this thread, at least for the last few pages. If you were nearly as much of an ally as you keep repeatedly claiming, your participation in this thread would very likely consist of more than merely explaining systemic discrimination you don't understand to marginalized people and complaining about how you don't like having to see queer issues represented all the time.

 

Like seriously, what the fuck kind of take is "actually, marginalized people aren't discriminated against because it's technically illegal to do so, and also our justice system has never exerted bias and handles all crimes with equal fervor." Why the fuck do you think that's more worth saying than, I dunno, dealing with the dickhead who thinks trans people showing up in TV shows means that oppression doesn't exist?

[Boorish]

3 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Like seriously, what the fuck kind of take is "actually, marginalized people aren't discriminated against because it's technically illegal to do so, and also our justice system has never exerted bias and handles all crimes with equal fervor."

Ben Shapiro.

[objectioner]

10 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

I mean - fair enough, point conceded I suppose, Japanese men made up a large portion of what I colloquially referred to as "White Men" but from a demographic and socio-political view standpoint, does that really make a difference?

 

 

 

Not trying to misrepresent you, but lumping 'white' and 'Japanese' together under the umbrella of just 'white' comes across incredibly racist.

[Breakingthegreen]

Say what you will of this thread, (I will, it was pointless) but it has been fabulous for my mute and my following list

Edited May 26, 2022 by breakingthegreen

[VigilantCrow]

Too much time is wasted on this nonsense instead of being focused on building games. No wonder games have stagnated over the last 15 years and became copy/paste projects with new skins.

[czDante92]

16 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

I'll make sure to tell the next trans person I meet who's struggling with homelessness because their parents disowned them that they're not oppressed because a Disney movie has five minutes of shitty representation in it.

And how exactly is LGBT movement change minds of those parents who hate trans people enough that they'll disown their own child? I haven't said anything bad against trans people and I got attacked, I doubt that's gonna change anyone's mind.
 

 

19 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

And what the fuck do you call state governments forcibly detransitioning trans people (even trans adults) and taking away trans children from their parents?

I haven't found a single adult case of forced detransitioning, but I have found plenty of cases of adults detransitioning on their own and claiming that transition ruined their lives.

[Alayaes]

12 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Now consider how much more mentally unhealthy it is to actually have to deal with that shit full time.

 

 

Yes, I'm queer, I've been homeless, I struggle with (and often fail) affording healthcare, and I've faced severe (non-sexual) abuse by christians. Do you have a point except that the realities of people such as myself are mere distant hypotheticals to you?

 

 

Perhaps not, however it is one thing to simply take breaks for the sake of your mental health, and it is another thing entirely to berate marginalized people talking about their issues because they're not doing it right. Which is what you've been doing in this thread, at least for the last few pages. If you were nearly as much of an ally as you keep repeatedly claiming, your participation in this thread would very likely consist of more than merely explaining systemic discrimination you don't understand to marginalized people and complaining about how you don't like having to see queer issues represented all the time.

 

Like seriously, what the fuck kind of take is "actually, marginalized people aren't discriminated against because it's technically illegal to do so, and also our justice system has never exerted bias and handles all crimes with equal fervor." Why the fuck do you think that's more worth saying than, I dunno, dealing with the dickhead who thinks trans people showing up in TV shows means that oppression doesn't exist?

You're being too emotional in this. I'm sorry that you've had to endure these hardships. I've had to endure my own hardships, none of which you are aware of, so I'm not sure that you can accurately insinuate that I am somehow speaking from a perspective of obliviousness or privilege? I'm going to chalk that up to the fact that you obviously have a lot of horses in this race, at which point I can understand your frustration.

 

You're narrowing the spectrum too much and turning it into a black and white issue. A yes or no debate, left or right, etc etc. That robs the discussion of the complexity that it demands and usually devolves it into nothing but a finger-pointing game or some form of oneupmanship about who suffers more. There are many, many more stations to stop at between 1) taking a break sometimes and 2) berating people. I have not berated anyone in this thread and I encourage you to point out where you've felt berated; I will apologize for that immediately if you do.

 

I presented objective facts without emotion. Me discussing rights within the legislation of the United States is an example of just that. These are facts and can't be disputed. However, I made it very clear that it doesn't render me oblivious to the societal struggles that are still continuing to this day. Just because I pointed out that the solution no longer lies in legislation but instead in the hands of society itself does not gatekeep me from being an ally. The more you focus on the actual issue at hand, the more you'll be able to change it. For instance, claiming that gay people don't have the right to adopt in the US is objectively false and does not further the progress to an actual, tangible solution that works for everyone. Pointing that out does not make me your adversary.

 

The quote you said about me claiming that marginalized people aren't discriminated against is intellectually dishonest and purposely misguided. I never made such a claim. I pointed out that the laws and legislation are already in place to protect these groups because the laws are made for all men and women, period, without exception. No law exists that I know of that says it only applies to certain demographics, be it in favor or against. The execution thereof? Perhaps. But I never claimed that the people executing said legislation were without bias or fault. That's a narrative you spun out of anger and frustration.

Edited May 26, 2022 by Alayaes

[Darling Baphomet]

1 minute ago, czDante92 said:

And how exactly is LGBT movement change minds of those parents who hate trans people enough that they'll disown their own child? I haven't said anything bad against trans people and I got attacked, I doubt that's gonna change anyone's mind.

 

You've spent the whole thread spouting transphobic bullshit, my dude. Why do you think your mind is worth changing?

Edited May 26, 2022 by Darling Baphomet