The LGBT Gamer Community Thread.


Gamer Life General Discussion

151 to 200 of 17,437 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Dot.


Dogbladewarrior wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Cunning. I worry about such situations, where low cunning succeeds so floridly over simple honesty. Not sure how I feel about the the situation.
I feel I should inform you here that I only ever "promote lying" in the most joking fashion, though some of my humor may be lost in toneless text.

Looking back at this thread again I realize I said this weirdly. What I was originally trying to say here but I was just real tired at the time and it came out strange and abbreviated is twofold: 1. Sometimes I make joking recommendations to people about silly things they can try but I'm doing it from a point of view of "Well maybe you can turn the situation around when it is going badly." As opposed to "I recommend you lie to and manipulate the people around you." Which I'm pretty sure everyone who reads my ramblings understands but like all things in my conversations I just thought I would state for clarities sake.

The second point which I haven't said at all but I think I should just bring up is that while I often share stories from my personal life and get into the details of what happens I'm saying them in a "This is what I have experienced and how I feel about it." tone not a "I condone the actions of the people in these stories."

I realize that the people I talk about, including myself, prolly often come off in a decently negative light and people might think "Wow, that is pretty ugly." but it just is what it is, I can't tell the truth of my situation and try to promote a deeper understanding of who I am and what I'm about if I don't tell the whole story(well, as much of the whole story as I can fit into a post).


Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.


its really great to read a thread like this, just to see the breadth of the community, and some staff members! Now if only those rumoured non-hetero Pathfinder Iconics would step out of their closets... (Just kidding, lets not start an argument over that. Though I think Harsk is totally one of them.)

I discovered both my sexuality (gay) and gaming when I got to university. Luckily my university gaming society was always great, and it was never an issue. I've never really had flak for it, though I am totally "straight-seeming" without really intending to be. I wonder about it sometimes, but I continue to struggle who I want to be.

Oddly though, I never played gay characters until I joined an online IRC gaming group that included some adult roleplaying, and encouraged building your "perfect" character. Suddenly, it was like a second lightbulb went off in my head. Firstly, that playing a gay character allowed to get into their head a lot more (who'da thought?), which was great. The other thing that roleplaying the character allowed me to be was to take charge of being really big physically. I'm tall and broadly built, but sometimes felt uncomfortable with it. I've come to realise it has great points though, like being able to defend myself from my demons, imagined as they might be.

I haven't had many experiences in playing IRL with LBGT gamers though. Two examples stick out, though. The first was a gay ST for Mage:TA who had some gay NPCs in his game, and it always struck me how empty their characters were; they sexuality defined them completely. I prefer characters with depth; after all my sexuality defines me only in part, anyone so one-dimensional just feels fake. (Though that ST turned out to be a horrible person, who stole my boyfriend. Happily in the past now.) The second example was a guy I played with for a short while, who never came out, exactly, but was incredibly obviously gay. He played a female character, and flaunted it constantly. The weirdest thing was how none of us would have cared, but he didn't ever admit anything, which made it a little awkward.


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.

As ever, I find it fascinating the blinders both genders put on when it comes to feminine douchebaggery.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.
As ever, I find it fascinating the blinders both genders put on when it comes to feminine douchebaggery.

Yes. I would like to amend my statement to the following:

Meh, straight or gay, male or female, about sex or not, most people are douchebags.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.
As ever, I find it fascinating the blinders both genders put on when it comes to feminine douchebaggery.

That's an unfair statement, and unfounded, IMO (one might even say "douchey"). I think most people generally are 1) aware that "people are jerks," and I just don't know about men, but based on my experience, women certainly do not put on blinders when it comes to either how high or how low another woman can go.

But at the same time I am uncomfortable speaking in general terms either way (and am unqualified to speak for anyone but myself)--there's a lot of diversity in behavior amongst men, women, trans, and genderqueer, so let's try to avoid the sweeping, grand statements, especially when they're backhandedly accusatory, okay?


I'm confused -did Doodlebug just ninja you, do you firmly disagree with my statement, or something else?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

And as an aside, I was not trying to be passive aggressive, snarky, or left handed/backhanded in any way - I was literally responding to Doodlebugs original statement, which he has since altered. I certainly don't think women responsible for every sin or romantic setback in life, just that I find it more interesting that men are held to a different standard. My perspective may stem from being a male raised by several generations of women, and being married to a woman who grew up in an entirely female household. You may have found it douchey in itself, tmdq, but I truly meant no offense, just pointing out what I believe is an interesting inequality.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DeathQuaker wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.
As ever, I find it fascinating the blinders both genders put on when it comes to feminine douchebaggery.

That's an unfair statement, and unfounded, IMO (one might even say "douchey"). I think most people generally are 1) aware that "people are jerks," and I just don't know about men, but based on my experience, women certainly do not put on blinders when it comes to either how high or how low another woman can go.

But at the same time I am uncomfortable speaking in general terms either way (and am unqualified to speak for anyone but myself)--there's a lot of diversity in behavior amongst men, women, trans, and genderqueer, so let's try to avoid the sweeping, grand statements, especially when they're backhandedly accusatory, okay?

I think Freehold DM might be talking from a "straight" perspective (I know, it's a strange label, but bear with me). Sure, most people know that both men and women can be douchebags, if pressed on the issue. But the standard position seems to be, especially among women, that most men are dogs and creeps. It just seems to be the default answer, even though they in reality DO know that not all men are like that. I guess it's a defence mechanism. It's just so sad that it's so ingrained.

This might stem from the obvious fact that most straight women haven't had to deal with other women in a romantic (or rather, not so romantic) fashion, so they only have one "actual/real/personal" perspective on the matter (as opposed to experiencing the same thing from their own gender).
And, yes, it's also a generalization, because obviously not all straight women are like that. I do have to say, though, from personal experience, that it's very commonplace (not because I've been accused of it, quite the contrary in fact, but from listening to women friends of mine).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you gg. I would like to add that the perspective you bring up is especially prevalent in the african American Community. In many ways to growing up, I saw and experienced a lot of virgin/whore type thinking aimed at men.

GentleGiant wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Meh. Straight or gay, when it comes to fun sexytime, people (mostly, but not limited to, men in their teens and tweens) act like douchebags.
As ever, I find it fascinating the blinders both genders put on when it comes to feminine douchebaggery.

That's an unfair statement, and unfounded, IMO (one might even say "douchey"). I think most people generally are 1) aware that "people are jerks," and I just don't know about men, but based on my experience, women certainly do not put on blinders when it comes to either how high or how low another woman can go.

But at the same time I am uncomfortable speaking in general terms either way (and am unqualified to speak for anyone but myself)--there's a lot of diversity in behavior amongst men, women, trans, and genderqueer, so let's try to avoid the sweeping, grand statements, especially when they're backhandedly accusatory, okay?

I think Freehold DM might be talking from a "straight" perspective (I know, it's a strange label, but bear with me). Sure, most people know that both men and women can be douchebags, if pressed on the issue. But the standard position seems to be, especially among women, that most men are dogs and creeps. It just seems to be the default answer, even though they in reality DO know that not all men are like that. I guess it's a defence mechanism. It's just so sad that it's so ingrained.

This might stem from the obvious fact that most straight women haven't had to deal with other women in a romantic (or rather, not so romantic) fashion, so they only have one "actual/real/personal" perspective on the matter (as opposed to experiencing the same thing from their own gender).
And, yes, it's also a generalization, because obviously not all straight women are like that. I do have to say, though, from personal experience, that it's very commonplace (not because I've been accused of it, quite the contrary in fact, but from listening to women...

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

Freehold DM wrote:
And as an aside, I was not trying to be passive aggressive, snarky, or left handed/backhanded in any way - I was literally responding to Doodlebugs original statement, which he has since altered. I certainly don't think women responsible for every sin or romantic setback in life, just that I find it more interesting that men are held to a different standard. My perspective may stem from being a male raised by several generations of women, and being married to a woman who grew up in an entirely female household. You may have found it douchey in itself, tmdq, but I truly meant no offense, just pointing out what I believe is an interesting inequality.

I was responding to your comment. To avoid going off topic, as I'd rather see folks discuss what the OP was talking about, I will not respond further (I still vehemently disagree with both of you, but I will agree to disagree for the sake of the thread), but to repeat my desire to avoid sweeping generalizations where possible (and will try to hold myself to same, as it's certainly easy to do when discussing broad categories of people).


I could be wrong, but the story that I was responding to is, imh experience, more of a male phenomenon than a female one. I admit I could be wrong, but I've never been privy to women coming up with elaborate schemes to get one night's play. It's not usually necessary.

That's all I meant. If you make the subject larger, as I did with my generalizing statement, then there are much more opportunities for men and women to exhibit their respective douchebaggery.

The other point I was trying to make was that Dogbladewarrior's friend's actions didn't make me think "what a scumbag!" they made me think "Meh, I've seen worse."


GentleGiant wrote:


I think Freehold DM might be talking from a "straight" perspective (I know, it's a strange label, but bear with me). Sure, most people know that both men and women can be douchebags, if pressed on the issue. But the standard position seems to be, especially among women, that most men are dogs and creeps. It just seems to be the default answer, even though they in reality DO know that not all men are like that. I guess it's a defence mechanism. It's just so sad that it's so ingrained.

With good reason. In living memory, most men were expected to behave absolutely abominably towards women and if so inclined could get away with almost anything.

And some men miss that.


This is not a response to anything anyone has said in this thread and is only sorta related to the thread at large but I feel like I should say it as it has been on my mind recently and I have a big interest in promoting greater understanding between people.

A Common Hiccup in Gender Relations, A Frank Discussion For Men (ladies, don’t read this, this is secret man talk and is not for you! For realz!!!!):

First I would like to preface this letter to my fellow men by saying that the following rant is based on my personal experience and nothing more. I’m not trying to tell you how you feel or imply that you don’t have meaningful relationships with the women in your life. I am simply pointing out something, based on my anecdotal observations, that I feel like is important for us to recognize. I’m not trying to offend you or smear your relationships. Alright then, on to the rant:

The thing that I often see men doing (and by often I mean 99% of the time.) that really doesn’t help relationships between the genders AT ALL is objectifying women. This is actually a subject that comes up on a regular basis in my personal life. Almost every time a guy is having a problem with his girlfriend/wife/whatever it really seems to boil down to this. When I point out that this is the root of his problem most men get offended.

“I don’t sexually objectify women!” He crys.

First of all, yes you do, we all do, the only men that don’t are really gay men whose sole sexual interest is in hard abs and thick sausages, but that’s not what I am talking about. I am literally talking about seeing a woman, on some level, as a “Thing.”, instead of a “Human”. The issue is complicated and while I can provide countless familiar situations to illustrate my point to you I will instead start with the core concept and expand a bit outwards for clarity’s sake, despite how ineffective that is when rubbing up against our natural denial about being sexist. The issue here is that when a man talks to a woman here is how his mind is working:

“Identify: This is a woman. Being a woman means (x+y+z=whatever value system you have subconsciously decided makes up the situation of “being a woman.”) Proceed to color all my interactions with her with subconscious assumptions about her state of being.”

The problem is you are coming at her like she is a theoretical construct of a person instead of a person. This is messed up and needs to stop because it leads to nothing good, no matter how pure your intentions in dealing with her are.

People often point out when I say this that this is simply how everyone treats everyone on some level but, while this is true, it is really, really bad in male to female relations, the only comparable circumstance I see is the way white people treat black people(but that is a different conversation).

Why would this be true? (and from my point of view, almost universally is and I’m not a person to make casual sweeping statements) I cannot honestly tell you. Really, I have no explanation. Perhaps it has something to do with the deep and almost spiritual connection we men have with our c0cks so relating to someone without one automatically puts them into the realm of “strange alien” I don’t know. It’s especially weird because, generally speaking, the opposite is not true. While women often have strong opinions about us and can be downright bigoted when things reach the point of having a relationship they always seem to start approaching us like people

I recently read “Men are from Mars, Women Are From Venus.” An extremely popular book about male/female relationships from the nineties.

My opinion of it? It’s the worst collection of misinformed claptrap I have ever read. The premise of the book literally is “Men and women are from two different societal worlds and are fundamentally different but here is how we can get along while both getting our needs met.”

People actually swallowed this steaming pile of horsesh!t? I feel sad for the world I live in. What you need to understand, gentle readers, is that women are not unknowable aliens with bizarrely obscure motivations but simply the other side of the human coin. They are people just you like with fully formed thoughts, feelings, and experiences.

The most important thing you can do for the women in your life, be they mother, lover or daughter?

When they are coming to you and start talking about themselves and their situation, take a moment out of your busy day to OPEN YOUR #$%^ING EARS AND LISTEN TO WHAT THE %^& SHE IS TRYING TO TELL YOU!!!!!!!!!!

In conclusion I will acknowledge that you are an enlightened modern man who none of this applies to even slightly and that my near universal experience with men is obviously a bizarre statistical anomaly. Even so, maybe it wouldn’t hurt to take a moment out of your busy manly schedule and ask yourself: “Am I treating the women in my life well?”


Dogbladewarrior wrote:

This is not a response to anything anyone has said in this thread and is only sorta related to the thread at large but I feel like I should say it as it has been on my mind recently and I have a big interest in promoting greater understanding between people.

** spoiler omitted **...

Dog, have you read Trouble on Triton by Samuel R. Delany? It was originally published as Triton. You might really, really enjoy it, or find that you've already considered every question it raises.

Delany is sort of a multi-cultural poster child (black, but light skinned enough to be mistaken for white, gay but married at the age 19 before the sexual revolution; the dude is just a font of cultural ambiguity, in a good way) and Triton is the book where he takes a look at straight men and says "Why are you like that?"


5 people marked this as a favorite.

.... Oooookaaaay....

I realize this is a rant, but it seems less aimed at promoting interest in mutual understanding and more at making heterosexual men feel bad about wrongs that they may or may not have committed. Any bigotry on the part of women is quietly brushed aside and the thrust seems to be that whole treating anyone poorly is wrong, it's only really really wrong when a man does it. I'm getting a planet of the apes vibe here re: the word "no".


I find that my biggest problem in relationships is that people assume that just because I am a goblin that I am a well-endowed, virtuoso lover with the precision of a fencing champion and the stamina of a stevedore.

Stop objectifying goblins!!

Who do it in the street!


My post is aimed at men(thus the spoiler saying so) but all men, not just men of a certain sexuality. Even gay men, who do not have the sexual element, I have experienced objectifying women and while women have plenty to take personal responsibility for in their lives the weight of how it has played out in our society rests more heavily on men in my opinion and we need to take an honest look at ourselves. You may disagree, but it how I feel.


Hitdice wrote:

Dog, have you read Trouble on Triton by Samuel R. Delany? It was originally published as Triton. You might really, really enjoy it, or find that you've already considered every question it raises.

Delany is sort of a multi-cultural poster child (black, but light skinned enough to be mistaken for white, gay but married at the age 19 before the sexual revolution; the dude is just a font of cultural ambiguity, in a good way) and Triton is the book where he takes a look at straight men and says "Why are you like that?"

I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.


Freehold, was the "it" you talked about the book I mentioned? If so, I'd love to talk it over, but this thread probably isn't the place for it.

Speaking as a straight male, I really don't want to take over the thread, so I'm going to keep reading and post only when I have something pertinent to offer.


I also should mention that everything I said about men literally does apply to myself as well. though the post was scathing at parts you can look at it as a conversation with myself if you find that less offensive. It has recently been pointed out to me that while I try my best to approach people in the most appropriate way even I have some unintentionally sexist world views. I am male, I feel have failed to treat women the way they deserve. I need to be better.


Dogbladewarrior wrote

Quote:


"Identify: This is a woman. Being a woman means (x+y+z=whatever value system you have subconsciously decided makes up the situation of “being a woman.”) Proceed to color all my interactions with her with subconscious assumptions about her state of being.”

Thinking like that is for me a part of the human condition. I believe we perceive people and things based on our inner worldview = our value system.

I don't think that sums up the entirety of our way to relate to others, but it's a sizable part of it. I acknowledge it, but I don't try to make it go away.

Instead I try to perceive people while immersed in benevolent love. Sometimes I even succeed ;-).

Fighting something fiercely is to be dependent of that very thing.

Just my 2 and a half cents. Interesting thread.


Hitdice wrote:

Freehold, was the "it" you talked about the book I mentioned? If so, I'd love to talk it over, but this thread probably isn't the place for it.

Speaking as a straight male, I really don't want to take over the thread, so I'm going to keep reading and post only when I have something pertinent to offer.

I haven't read that book, but I will keep an. eye out for it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.

You might want to check out Mad Men. It's ostensibly a period character drama set in the 60s but along the way there's a deep exploration of masculinity and femininity in America.


Quiche Lisp wrote:

Dogbladewarrior wrote

Quote:


"Identify: This is a woman. Being a woman means (x+y+z=whatever value system you have subconsciously decided makes up the situation of “being a woman.”) Proceed to color all my interactions with her with subconscious assumptions about her state of being.”

Thinking like that is for me a part of the human condition. I believe we perceive people and things based on our inner worldview = our value system.

I don't think that sums up the entirety of our way to relate to others, but it's a sizable part of it. I acknowledge it, but I don't try to make it go away.

Instead I try to perceive people while immersed in benevolent love. Sometimes I even succeed ;-).

Fighting something fiercely is to be dependent of that very thing.

Just my 2 and a half cents. Interesting thread.

Yes it is just a basic part of human thinking, two things though: It's not about whether you love or hate the person but about the assumptions you are making about them and two: the reason I am pointing this out is because I feel these assumptions by men are, perhaps completely unintentionally, being used as a weapon against women. I fully acknowledge that I might just be completely crazy and not only is this not happening all over the place, it is only happening in my delusional mind. If true then I am just a crazy person raving on the internet, no harm done, but if things are the way I see them and the possibility exists that bringing it into the conscious awareness of the people doing it makes it so they can change it I feel it should be at least mentioned.


Samnell wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.
You might want to check out Mad Men. It's ostensibly a period character drama set in the 60s but along the way there's a deep exploration of masculinity and femininity in America.

You know my cousin has been trying to get me to watch that show with her for awhile, to see what I think of it, but I've just always been busy. I will take your recommendation though and do so when I next hang out with her.


Actually, you know what is really just burning my @$$ right now and upsetting me? I've thought for a long time that some of the biggest problems we face as human beings are caused by a failure to empathize but while I still think that what is just eating me up is that it is not a result of people not trying, people are trying, it's just so DAMN HARD. I have no problem living in a world where the problem is people arn't trying, because then it can be fixed by making a descision to try, but living in a world where people are trying their very best and everything is still just a colossal mess is really hard for me to accept.


Samnell wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.
You might want to check out Mad Men. It's ostensibly a period character drama set in the 60s but along the way there's a deep exploration of masculinity and femininity in America.

What do you think of the show, Samnell?


I'd say that your view is a bit extreme.

Dogbladewarrior wrote:
Quiche Lisp wrote:

Dogbladewarrior wrote

Quote:


"Identify: This is a woman. Being a woman means (x+y+z=whatever value system you have subconsciously decided makes up the situation of “being a woman.”) Proceed to color all my interactions with her with subconscious assumptions about her state of being.”

Thinking like that is for me a part of the human condition. I believe we perceive people and things based on our inner worldview = our value system.

I don't think that sums up the entirety of our way to relate to others, but it's a sizable part of it. I acknowledge it, but I don't try to make it go away.

Instead I try to perceive people while immersed in benevolent love. Sometimes I even succeed ;-).

Fighting something fiercely is to be dependent of that very thing.

Just my 2 and a half cents. Interesting thread.

Yes it is just a basic part of human thinking, two things though: It's not about whether you love or hate the person but about the assumptions you are making about them and two: the reason I am pointing this out is because I feel these assumptions by men are, perhaps completely unintentionally, being used as a weapon against women. I fully acknowledge that I might just be completely crazy and not only is this not happening all over the place, it is only happening in my delusional mind. If true then I am just a crazy person raving on the internet, no harm done, but if things are the way I see them and the possibility exists that bringing it into the conscious awareness of the people doing it makes it so they can change it I feel it should be at least mentioned.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Men also objectify other men.
Women objectify men.
Women even objectify women.

If he or she is purposefully with intent encouraging it, then I'm not going to feel any shame in returning such.

The difference is to be intelligent enough to know when it isn't wanted and to cease such activities.

It isn't just humans. It's primal in nature. There's a reason there's plumage on a peacock. The males, I might add.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll pitch in as well.

First of all, this is best thread we've had so far on the subject. Most of the other ones have been crapposted to oblivion, either intentionally by trolls and attention mongers or accidentally by confused triply priviledged individuals with entitlement problems. I'm just sick of the old "this doesn't cornern me/I have spotted something that is hard to fit into my world view, so please stop talking about it" followed by something along the lines of "can't take a joke, huh" or "ok ok, but think of the children!".

Sexuality is such a natural thing. We encounter it everywhere in our lives be it when meeting acquintances or upon reading an rpg rulebook. Somehow we still can make a huge deal about it, particularly when the norms suddenly don't fit into our expectations. Baffling.

So yeah, nice to have a civil thread without crap.

My gaming and bisexual history is so tiny that I don't have much to prattle about. Suffice it to say there seems to be a bigger issue with ideology in our gaming groups than sexuality per se. It's pretty darn hard to be a feminist without having a couple of manchildren get uppity and condescending about it.

Same goes for academia, I guess. I get more "huhs" and "whys" about Butler than I get about Joshi. Yeah yeah, I know, he's a pretty big name when it comes to Lovecraft, but the guy's a bibliographer fer Thor's sake. Doesn't have too much to offer when it comes to hybridity or identity either. People.

Anyhow, nice to be here. Sorry for rambling. :P


Urizen wrote:

Men also objectify other men.

Women objectify men.
Women even objectify women.

If he or she is purposefully with intent encouraging it, then I'm not going to feel any shame in returning such.

The difference is to be intelligent enough to know when it isn't wanted and to cease such activities.

It isn't just humans. It's primal in nature. There's a reason there's plumage on a peacock. The males, I might add.

I understand this, the thing I'm picking up on is...different somehow. It's in the tone not the actions, it's darker than your typical misunderstandings I just can't find the words to express why. I'm finding it extremely difficult to articulate the nebulous context of what I am seeing but never the less I'm seeing it and knowing it for the bad thing it is.


Freehold DM wrote:
Samnell wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.
You might want to check out Mad Men. It's ostensibly a period character drama set in the 60s but along the way there's a deep exploration of masculinity and femininity in America.
What do you think of the show, Samnell?

I think it's the best-written novel on TV. It really is more like a long book unfolding than a show.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I understand this, the thing I'm picking up on is...different somehow. It's in the tone not the actions, it's darker than your typical misunderstandings I just can't find the words to express why. I'm finding it extremely difficult to articulate the nebulous context of what I am seeing but never the less I'm seeing it and knowing it for the bad thing it is.

I'll posit that there are those that do so with ill intent. I'm not blind to it.

But if there is a complete lack of objectification, then I'm willing to stipulate that you'll see a decrease in the propagation of the species. I'm simply stating that objectification isn't specific / exclusive to homo sapiens sapiens.

But if a woman is dressing hot to kill and she wants me to know it and return my affections for it, then I'm not going to feel shamed for it. Exactly in the same fashion that no-one should be shamed into expressing how they feel for those of the same gender or however they wish to pursue such activities as long as the feeling is mutual / consensual.

I'm like Freehold; I'm very supportive. But it has to work both ways. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Urizen wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I understand this, the thing I'm picking up on is...different somehow. It's in the tone not the actions, it's darker than your typical misunderstandings I just can't find the words to express why. I'm finding it extremely difficult to articulate the nebulous context of what I am seeing but never the less I'm seeing it and knowing it for the bad thing it is.

I'll posit that there are those that do so with ill intent. I'm not blind to it.

But if there is a complete lack of objectification, then I'm willing to stipulate that you'll see a decrease in the propagation of the species. I'm simply stating that objectification isn't specific / exclusive to homo sapiens sapiens.

But if a woman is dressing hot to kill and she wants me to know it and return my affections for it, then I'm not going to feel shamed for it. Exactly in the same fashion that no-one should be shamed into expressing how they feel for those of the same gender or however they wish to pursue such activities as long as the feeling is mutual / consensual.

I'm like Freehold; I'm very supportive. But it has to work both ways. :)

Clearly, we must merge into one super-supportive demigod. Our foes will tremble.


Sorry Dogblade, nothing wrong with 'objectifying' others, you can actually do that AND see them as human beings at the same time.

IKR?!

Amazing concept.

Paizo Employee Managing Editor

Folks, can the objectification discussion please move to a new thread? It's really starting to clutter up this one. Thanks!


Freehold DM wrote:
Samnell wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I have not, but I am always looking to learn about new perspectives, I'll check it out.
You might want to check out Mad Men. It's ostensibly a period character drama set in the 60s but along the way there's a deep exploration of masculinity and femininity in America.
What do you think of the show, Samnell?

I'm not Samnell, but I think Don Draper is very possibly the least interesting character. Peggy and Joanie are just living through the era, whereas Don needs a secret identity and whatnot; Dawn the secretary could well become the most socially relevant character.


Urizen wrote:
Dogbladewarrior wrote:
I understand this, the thing I'm picking up on is...different somehow. It's in the tone not the actions, it's darker than your typical misunderstandings I just can't find the words to express why. I'm finding it extremely difficult to articulate the nebulous context of what I am seeing but never the less I'm seeing it and knowing it for the bad thing it is.

I'll posit that there are those that do so with ill intent. I'm not blind to it.

But if there is a complete lack of objectification, then I'm willing to stipulate that you'll see a decrease in the propagation of the species. I'm simply stating that objectification isn't specific / exclusive to homo sapiens sapiens.

But if a woman is dressing hot to kill and she wants me to know it and return my affections for it, then I'm not going to feel shamed for it. Exactly in the same fashion that no-one should be shamed into expressing how they feel for those of the same gender or however they wish to pursue such activities as long as the feeling is mutual / consensual.

I'm like Freehold; I'm very supportive. But it has to work both ways. :)

Fair enough. Though I will point out I've never made the argument "it's evil to be sexually attracted to someone" only that dehumanizing them, whether intentional or not, is something I find extremely negative. Why climb up men's @$$'s specifically for something everyone does? I dunno, perhaps I hold the sexist belief that we have a responsibility to try harder.


Judy Bauer wrote:
Folks, can the objectification discussion please move to a new thread? It's really starting to clutter up this one. Thanks!

Yes, I am sorry, I didn't mean to derail this thread. This is meant to be a positive place based around good supportive feelings, sometimes my strong sense of justice gets the better of me, rightly or not. I will move on.


So I lost one of my favorite characters last night =(. He was a rather intellectually dim two handed fighter archetype dwarf miner who’s toughness and ballzyness were his main selling point. An intense fight with some undead where negative levels were stacked pretty heavily was featured and, being psychotically brave like he was(and also pretty dumb), at one point he met the gaze of a bodak(and rolled badly). After his death I learned that because it was a death effect resurrecting him was not easily within our party’s capability, so it’s time to roll a new character. I am sad=(

On the plus side we are level 9, perhaps this is a good time to make a wizard!

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

On the subject of sexuality and gaming...

Some random thoughts...

- I do pick the sexual preferences of my characters, even if it never is mentioned in game. They've been bi, gay, straight, and asexual. For me it's just part of the process of determining different things about their likes, dislikes, and other core personality traits. It may not come up just like it may not come up that I decided that a character, say, is getting over a gambling addiction or had a favorite pet rabbit as a child.

- Sometimes it bothers me when a GM starts having NPCs hit on my characters--expecting me to take the NPC up on the offer. That last qualifier is important. If I have noted my character is beautiful and she's carrying the holy symbol of the goddess of love, a passing reference to, "X folks are checking your PC out," that's one thing. It especially bothers me when they assume the sexual preferences of my PC without asking (and assuming the PC will take the NPC up on the offer).

Not of course that games involve a lot of in-character flirtation. It tends to be the exception rather than the rule, but we're all adults here (or curious, horny adolescents), sometimes it makes sense for PCs to decide to seek someone out (and vice versa). But there's what I like to think of as a "fantasy safety bubble" -- there's assumptions you just do not make and lines you do not cross without explicitly making sure the player is okay with it first.

- I once played a bisexual shapeshifter named "Chris" in a Mutants and Masterminds game. Her sexuality did not come to the forefront, mind. But the group I was playing with is probably one of the most socially straight-laced groups I play with and it bugged a few of them they were never sure of the character's real gender. Again, this was not a forefront thing. But there was an undercurrent. I found it interesting, just in terms of observing human behavior. (It's kind of like the Varsuuvius phenomenon from Order of the Stick--it really bothers some people that s/he does not canonly fall into a specific gender binomial category).

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

First of all, obligatory identification bit: I'm a straight male gamer, married to a straight female gamer (that last bit will become slightly more relevant in a second). I'm posting because I've had a couple of odd intersections between alt-sexuality and gaming, and this seems like the place to talk about them.

Specifically...

DeathQuaker wrote:

- Sometimes it bothers me when a GM starts having NPCs hit on my characters--expecting me to take the NPC up on the offer. That last qualifier is important. If I have noted my character is beautiful and she's carrying the holy symbol of the goddess of love, a passing reference to, "X folks are checking your PC out," that's one thing. It especially bothers me when they assume the sexual preferences of my PC without asking (and assuming the PC will take the NPC up on the offer).

Not of course that games involve a lot of in-character flirtation. It tends to be the exception rather than the rule, but we're all adults here (or curious, horny adolescents), sometimes it makes sense for PCs to decide to seek someone out (and vice versa). But there's what I like to think of as a "fantasy safety bubble" -- there's assumptions you just do not make and lines you do not cross without explicitly making sure the player is okay with it first.

I had an strange situation where the reverse of this problem kind of came up in one of my games. I was running Council of Thieves for my home group, and my wife decided to play a gay man. His orientation was, initially, not a particularly important piece of character information, but as soon as the group met the Children of Westcrown and I roleplayed through the experience of meeting them, she decided that her character was attracted to one of the guys (Sclavo, if you're curious) and wanted to pursue a relationship with him. Unfortunately, in my head, Sclavo was straight, and while my normal response would be to think, "Well, the doomed crush thing has cool roleplaying potential!" it turns out that it doesn't work as well when the player in question is your wife. (She's still bitter that an NPC former lover of hers sacrificed himself to save her... in a game I ran almost a decade ago...) The game fell apart for other reasons before I could figure out what to do about it. I'm still not sure what I would or should have done...

Sczarni

Shifty wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Shifty, must we be on opposite sides of every issue?!??!

Because you choose to be arbitrarily contrary?

It's true, I look forward to the day when the subject becomes a non-subject in the way we don't feel the need to converse about whether the sky is blue, and indeed it becomes a general day to day non-issue where the notion of where one puts ones private parts and with whom raises no eyebrows nor interest, and indeed no one really cares apart from those who might be interested in joining in.

I'm hoping for Sexuality threads to make about as much sense as a blue eyed thread, or 'people who drink water' thread.

Now if you are saying that you would like it to remain always a conversation piece where people feel the need to 'identify' (or worse, feel compelled to conceal) their sexuality, then I would suggest you are advocating that you are maintaining the status quo.

I'd personally like an end to the stupid 'politics' around the issue - you are suggesting you would like to maintain them.

In that case I welcome you to the opposition.

Won't be long now until the final hurdle of gay marriage gets crossed, and then thats pretty much the end of the battle won in this country.

Hate to say it, but gay marriage is not the final hurdle. It's a big one, but it's not the last. With many states still supporting the ability to hire and fire for no apparent reason given other than "because," people of open alternative sexualities will still find themselves in the position many women find themselves in today: Inferior job security, inferior pay in just about every market where they're "accepted."

Discrimination based on race isn't over, either. If nothing else, for some highly-distinguishable ancestries it may be accelerating lately. (Or that may just be my perception because I've run into a bubble of it on the Internet.)


I also pick sexuality of my characters. Well, most of the time it defaults to heterosexual male but I played one explicitly bisexual character and one explicitly asexual hermetic mage. The second one brought some attention, actually, mostly in the form of joking references to the nationally of that character (British) and single suggestion that the character is deeply closeted gay.

Sczarni

Ragnarok Aeon wrote:

While I identify as straight, the truth is that I am attracted to people with a pretty face, silky hair, and soft skin regardless of sex. This is difficult to talk about, not because I'm afraid of people ostracizing me, but because I don't want people to misunderstand. I still prefer the feminine figure, I like cute and pretty people. I don't want macho gay guys going after me. I don't really want to and shop with the gay crowd and act like them, because that's not who I am. I'm not the hollywood bisexual stereotype who will bang anything. I still judge people by how pretty they are. I have always found muscles unattractive, so masculine figures definitely bother me. For me, I just don't talk about my interests out of convenience. Too much explaining, and it's not like my life is or ever will be in shambles because I don't talk about it. Sometimes I consider telling people about it, but it just seems like it would take too much work for me to not be misunderstood. Sometimes I hope that I'll meet a girl and be surprised. I really don't know how else to go about it because asking someone if they have a penis would just seem rude.

I find the terms straight or gay or even bisexual too limiting to properly describe my orientation. I have a gay friend who says I'm not gay, so what am I!?

(y*n*)y

You could consider the term "pansexual." Another friend of mine identifies as "non-binary."


I enjoyed reading this and it was a lot of fun to read. The backstory you've mentioned about yourself puts things in perspective and I have ot admit, I agree about gamers being really smart as I too am reletively new to the community...well actuallly possibly a year or two, but I still consider myself new as I never grew up with D&D (unless you consider the TV show) or any other gaming system.

Sometimes I find they're too smart for they're own good as they can come up with multiple ways to beat encounters or solve problems which can be frustraiting but in a fun way. I enjoy seeing my player's brainstorm over every little thing and come up with a million and one solutions to something that I could only see 5 in :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Pemrich wrote:
Ragnarok Aeon wrote:

While I identify as straight, the truth is that I am attracted to people with a pretty face, silky hair, and soft skin regardless of sex. This is difficult to talk about, not because I'm afraid of people ostracizing me, but because I don't want people to misunderstand. I still prefer the feminine figure, I like cute and pretty people. I don't want macho gay guys going after me. I don't really want to and shop with the gay crowd and act like them, because that's not who I am. I'm not the hollywood bisexual stereotype who will bang anything. I still judge people by how pretty they are. I have always found muscles unattractive, so masculine figures definitely bother me. For me, I just don't talk about my interests out of convenience. Too much explaining, and it's not like my life is or ever will be in shambles because I don't talk about it. Sometimes I consider telling people about it, but it just seems like it would take too much work for me to not be misunderstood. Sometimes I hope that I'll meet a girl and be surprised. I really don't know how else to go about it because asking someone if they have a penis would just seem rude.

I find the terms straight or gay or even bisexual too limiting to properly describe my orientation. I have a gay friend who says I'm not gay, so what am I!?

(y*n*)y

You could consider the term "pansexual." Another friend of mine identifies as "non-binary."

I'd say Bi just to cover the term of men and women that have those certain qualities you are looking for, but also Pan covers those who have gone through sex change operations too.

I'm the same actually, I find muscles unattractive and I don't act like a sterotypical gay guy who wears pink and enjoys shopping for cloths, I hate shopping for cloths and pink.

Like you I have a type when it comes to guy, not liking muscles but loving slim and petite guys.

I'd personally say maybe you are bi, but you just have your own certain type like many people do.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow, I never scroll this far down on the forum list so I missed this thread until now. Two things in it I really wanna address.

One is that the LGBT community will always exist. We are a subculture that is worldwide, and even after we get full recognition in every nation (which is likely a century or so away) the bonds formed in the fight for it will remain forever.

Second, Ragnarok and Sutter aren't alone for sure. I identify now as gay since I am in a long term relationship with my fiancee, but my orientation is definitely bi and I am very attracted to androgyny. I like girls with short hair and boys with long, and "traps" rule.

Dotted ^^

151 to 200 of 17,437 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / The LGBT Gamer Community Thread. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.