Slashdot Mirror
On Gay Characters In Videogames
Thanks to Armchair Arcade for its feature discussing the portrayal of gay characters in videogames past and present. The article starts by pointing out: "In Troika Games' computer role playing game The Temple of Elemental Evil (2003)... the player is asked to rescue, and given the option to marry, an openly gay character", and ends by arguing: "Gay avatars are an inevitable development in the evolution of the videogame that will take place with or without this article. If we already see such possibilities opening up in even mainstream titles like The Temple of Elemental Evil, I doubt it will be long before even the idea of a fantasy role-playing game featuring only one white male avatar will seem a strange, misguided aspect of our distant past."
The issue of gays in videogames will get a lot more mainstream soon, one example is that the website for "The Sims 2" says that members of the same gender will be able to marry each other.
http://thesims2.ea.com/about_faq.php
Well, we're bound to see some more gays in video games under the political climate. It really wouldn't surprise me to see quite a few titles.
Why? Instant publicity. Your game will get mentioned in the press if you give it a decent enough initial push. Gay influence has already saturated movies, television, and music. It hasn't really been a big issue in video games (this slight mention doesn't really make it a big issue). But, if you show that it's out there, you can get the mainstream press debating like mad. Imagine Bill O'Reilly and Rosie O'Donnell debating in a knife fight.
Those debates equal massive amounts of money, and gays will buy the game just to show support over the issue. A larger company might end up boycotted by some, but that would probably blow over.
Eventually, this whole thing will die down. But, if a game company were to play their cards right, it could equal massive amounts of money.
Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
Yeah, and the game's political agenda already tilts left. You've got the white guilt-inducing natives with smallpox mission, and the mission where you murder 30 zookeepers to free 4 animals and it's considered an act of good. They coulda tossed gay prostitution in the mix too.
The goatse guy for president. Win one for the gaper!
Eagle from Capcom vs SNK 2 (who was a character in the original Street Fighter) came out of the closet in that game as an openly gay character. Many of his winning quotes in the Japanese version of the game show this. The American version, however, had the quotes changed to not show his sexuality.
Well, I'm not so sure. Everquest aside, the vast majority of the players are young men who, apparently, feel very insecure about their sexuality.
Yeah, that's true. I was too general in my original statement. I suspect that RPG players might be a little more tolerant. Most of my online gaming experience has been with MMORPGs, and while you do see overuse of "fag," "gay," etc, you are talking about a genre where the vast majority of female characters are played by males.
And there is a lot of flirting that goes on between male and female characters, though most of the players are (presumably straight) males.
But yeah, I've heard stories about the chat that goes on during FPSes. Sounds horrible.
the idea of a fantasy role-playing game featuring only one white male avatar will seem a strange, misguided aspect of our distant past.
Right. Because heterosexual white males are, in fact, nothing more than a myth. And anyone saying otherwise is a homophobe or a terrorist. Puh-leeze.
One white male avatar will seem strange and misguided??! Oh, of course. White males aren't really people. They are just dragons waiting to eat all the REAL, CLAIRVOIANT PEOPLE. After all, "white" is a real race. Just like ALL "black" people are african-americans. I guess I'm German-American, or European-American.... No? Not born in Europe or even in Germany you say? But the "black" baby born in Cleveland is somehow African-American?? Why not Kenyan-American, or even Egyptian-American?
This story irritates me to no end. "Nickelodeon says it's cool to be gay!!" "MTV says all the white men are out to get me!" Why is this story big news?? Personally, I don't care what happens in your bedroom, and lets keep it that way, thank you very much. Also, what's so wrong about white males? I happen to be one, and don't think that I am contributing to the ruination of society by simply existing.
I know for a fact that I can't be "The Man". I can barely wake up before 11:00 AM, much less keep entire races of peoples from attaining financial independance. It's not me!!! (or most of us, for that matter)
Blah... I'm drunk and ranting... but you get my point. If you don't get it... I don't care. I'm gonna be sleeping until it's time for work.
If bad puns were like deli meat, this would be the wurst
Your pop-psychology is obviously of limited depth. For instance, you equate crude behavior with skin disorders - as if those with acne have somehow brought it on themselves. Tell me, are you insecure about your own skin condition? Let's discuss.
Guess what - I'm smarter than you.
I'll go one step further -- I know gay people who do it. It really is just common slang now. Gay means either homosexual or stupid. It can mean both, but doesn't always.
That said, I do try not to use it that way myself, but I'm exposed to it constantly, and ever so rarely it slips out.
I for one, have a lesbian sister, who cares, it's her life. I don't know ANYONE that is a gamer and gay, is it really something we need to discuss?
But in today's media frenzie about gay marriage you have to stop and ask yourself, why does 2% of the american populate have 98% of the media/political focus? Is this really SUCH a big issue nowadays?
Our forefathers meant free, as in free for rich white property owning men; we take it as meaning free for everybody.
I'm sure gays weren't intended in the civil rights acts, but we can take it as if they're included. It wasn't rights just for blacks, it was for everybody
Error 407 - No creative sig found
To me the best gay character in a game is great, because it was completely unintentional. The character is Crassius Curio in the game Morrowind. He was intended to be a very lecherous, but straight character. However, there was a bug that caused him to give the dialogue for female players regardless of the character's actual gender. The result: he comes across as absolutely, flamingly gay.
For great justice.
This is the first thing I thought of when I read the headline, and for me, it's really the worse part about online gaming. I really don't care about being politcally correct, yet I can't help but cringe everytime I see/hear these kinds of homophobic insults. I've often thought that, if I had my own counterstrike server, I would definitely have the system censor the words and kick players for using them too much.
As you say, many people think it's ok because they don't really mean homosexual. But considering the original meaning of the word 'gay', it's clear that the word got it's current negative connotation because of homophobia, and the fact that it has become so prevalent as an insult is a clear indication of how deeply homophobia is ingrained in our society.
Both of these games had the ability to let the player have gay or lesbian encounters. Sure, it wasn't a major plot point of either game, but the fact that you could, if you wanted to (curious or otherwise) go to a bath house in Buccaneer's Den and have sex with the same sex was definitely pushing boundaries. I remember in Serpent Isle, even though you were female, Frigidazzi would still want to have sex with you. How old are those games now? 1992/1993.
I'd be happy to concede that marriage was originally a religious sacrament, but no such religious connotation is implied in modern, civil, male-female marriage and none would be implied in same-sex marriages. If marriage still had a necessary religious component in our country then judges and justices of the peace wouldn't perform it in courthouses and atheists wouldn't be able to get married. Marriage as it applies to our government is a purely civil union, but not all civil unions afford the same rights as marriage.
If you think it would be more palatable to the American public to replace all marriages with civil unions and allow same-sex couples to enter into those same types of civil unions, i'd be all for it. In this case, i think it's easier and more practical to say that same-sex couples can be legally married than it is to say that all marriages are now merely civil unions in the eyes of the law.
P.S.
The version of the bible i checked (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/kjv.browse.html), Lev 25:13 says, "In the year of this jubile ye shall return every man unto his possession." Not quite sure how that applies.
Perhaps you were looking for:
Lev 18:22 is "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Or maybe: Lev 13:9-12 "These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you."
Had any good shrimp or lobster lately? Hope not. That's an abomination too!
Don't forget about Lev 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Denying them the right to marry is not enough. If you accept the biblical authority, you have to kill gay men.
And people who curse their mom or dad. (Lev 20:9)
And adulterers. (Lev 20:10)
And people who sleep with their mothers/sons or stepmothers/stepsons. (Lev 20:11)
And people who sleep with their fathers-in-law/daughters-in-law. (Lev 20:12)
And men who do both a woman and her mom, as well as the mother/daughter. They get a special fiery death prescribed! (Lev 20:14)
Also note that no out is given for rape, so even if a man rapes a mother/daughter pair, too bad - all three must die.
Lev 20:15-16 says that if men or women sleep with animals you have to kill them and the animals! Interesting to note that this is singled out for women as well as men - most of the others aren't. Does that mean that lesbians are ok? I guess father-daughter incest is covered by the mother/daughter prohibition, but it apparently ok to sleep with your stepdaughters. Unless that's covered by adultery, but given the rest of the special shout-outs, i doubt it.
And don't forget wizards and men and women with "familiar spirits" - burn them! No wait - don't burn them! They have to be stoned to death! (Lev 20:27)
"Christians" (What did Jesus say about this particular topic anyway?) love to pick and choose when it comes to Leviticus, but that's irrelevant because this nation does not recognize biblical authority.
We've got our own laws and some of the most important ones say you can't force your religion on anyone else or deny equal rights to all.
You can't even make a decent citation, much less an entire argument. I think that officially makes you the bitch.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
I am working on a couple of assumptions here, so the whole thing falls apart if they are incorrect [...] 2. [Heterosexual attraction] occurs to promote procreation of the species.
Not always. Some claim that the gay gene is recessive but pops up more often when a village needs more "parents" to stay at home and help the straight moms care for the little ones than "breadwinners" to go hunt for food. Therefore, having gay adults in the village may give the children a better chance of survival.
(Read More...)