22176 réponses à ce sujet

[ladyofpayne]

AWW! Where is my penis when I need it?!

[Lebanese Dude]

AWW! Where is my penis when I need it?!

[herkles]

I look foreward to dorian, even if my first character is a female. He seems like a fun character, and that he will bring plenty of snarkyness and fun to the group

 

 

For the record, I think instead of 'the gay mage', dorian's nickname should be 'the mage with the awesome mustache' because well it is an awesome mustache.

[Lebanese Dude]

No offense, but that is crap.

 

Of course the words have more meaning than they were meant to have. I'm sure the interviewer didn't intend it as an emasculating remark. But that in itself is a problem. Innocent ignorance is still ignorance.

 

What are the most central descriptors that can be ascribed to Dorian based on what we know?

 

He's a mage.

He's from Tevinter.

He has dark hair and a rather distinctive mustache.

He's gay.

 

So why does the default descriptor tend to be "the gay mage"? Why do developers have to go out of their way to explain that the character has traits more important than their sexuality? And why, as far as I'm willing to bet, will "gay" continue to be the dominant descriptor used in reference to Dorian even once we've learned all about his story and character?

 

Once it was learned that he was gay the fact that he's from Tevinter or he has an incredibly unique mustache go out the window. Even when one of those qualities is as much of or more of a topic of general conversation (referring to his mustache, of course). If no one knew he was gay, people would still be using his mustache (or the fact that he's from Tevinter, which is easily the most interesting thing about him) as the primary way to identify him and we'd be all the merrier.

 

Anyway, not trying to come off as standoffish in case it reads that way. Can be hard to tell in text.

 

When I go the USA people sometimes see me as the "Lebanese guy", other times as the "Gay guy", and in certain circles the "Lebanese Gay guy".

 

Similarly, the interviewer could have easily said the "Tevinter Mage" or the "Gay Tevinter" or "Mustachio'd Tevinter" whatever.

 

He chose "gay mage" to pursue the intended tangent.

 

Major characteristics are often used to categorize someone for simplicity's sake. You're dramatizing this. Over-sensitivity to basic description is a problem in itself.

[Super Shamois]

 

When I go the USA people sometimes see me as the "Lebanese guy", other times as the "Gay guy", and in certain circles the "Lebanese Gay guy".

 

Similarly, the interviewer could have easily said the "Tevinter Mage" or the "Gay Tevinter" or "Mustachio'd Tevinter" whatever.

 

He chose "gay mage" to pursue the intended tangent.

 

Major characteristics are often used to categorize someone for simplicity's sake. You're dramatizing this. Over-sensitivity to basic description is a problem in itself.

 

I don't think so. It's a legitimate issue when people are reduced simply to their sexuality as if it were their whole identity, because it happens altogether too often. A lot of people find it dehumanizing, which is something I can't attest personally to since I am a part of the majority, but it's evident all the same; I'm not sure I would call those people over-sensitive.

[Lucy Glitter]

I'm in a conundrummy hat. I reallly wanna hang out on the Dorian thread BUT I am terrified of seeing more spoilers about his personality and backstory... AAAHH~ I'm thinking when the reviews start piling out, Imma have to be outta here

In other news - that gif... those cheekbones... dat 'stache. Complete package.



Do you guys reckon that his face has been tweaked a bit since we saw him in earlier gameplay videos? Such as the Redcliffe demo? It's probably lighting but his cheekbones and eyes seem different. He looks a bit younger, too.

[LizFiz931]

Do you guys reckon that his face has been tweaked a bit since we saw him in earlier gameplay videos? Such as the Redcliffe demo? It's probably lighting but his cheekbones and eyes seem different. He looks a bit younger, too.

 

I think they've been tweaking all the companions to varying degrees. 

[Trophonius]

Do you guys reckon that his face has been tweaked a bit since we saw him in earlier gameplay videos? Such as the Redcliffe demo? It's probably lighting but his cheekbones and eyes seem different. He looks a bit younger, too.

I think so too. His face has gotten more refined and detailed throughout development. It's definitely improved from his E3 look, at least.

[Lucy Glitter]

Yeah, comparing the two images. I reckon his eyes are bigger and forehead a bit wider. 

[pastabender]

I don't think so. It's a legitimate issue when people are reduced simply to their sexuality as if it were their whole identity, because it happens altogether too often. A lot of people find it dehumanizing, which is something I can't attest personally to since I am a part of the majority, but it's evident all the same; I'm not sure I would call those people over-sensitive.

It's basically like saying "oh he's my gay friend" etc. Fair enough if the interviewer wanted to talk about his sexuality, and even though he wouldn't have intended harm, it is part of the problem, even amongst the gay community where people are defined by their sexuality and is something I know all too much about. He could have just phrased the whole thing a lot better. I'm with you on this one.

Anyway, the blood magic thing is interesting. Strong views hints at disapproval, but perhaps not. I can't help but somewhat see the similarities between Necromancy and Blood Magic, at least with the stigma attached to both of them. 

[Madrict]

Love the outfit Dorian has on in the video that shows off a bit of his shoulder etc! Less is more Dorian xD

 

He looks amazing! Will definitely romance him first, then Iron Bull on second play through.

 

Thank you Bioware for creating such awesome looking/sounding companions and covering many orientations. You guys rock!

[Lebanese Dude]

I don't think so. It's a legitimate issue when people are reduced simply to their sexuality as if it were their whole identity, because it happens altogether too often. A lot of people find it dehumanizing, which is something I can't attest personally to since I am a part of the majority, but it's evident all the same; I'm not sure I would call those people over-sensitive.

I don't see this happening here. They aren't discussing whether a Dorian should be allowed to adopt a baby.

They are simply describing him. This is no different than calling him a Tevinter...

[ACD101]

Love the outfit Dorian has on in the video that shows off a bit of his shoulder etc! Less is more Dorian xD

 

 

Yes, just the right amount of sideboob. 

[Fredward]

I'm sure the interviewer didn't intend it as an emasculating remark.

 

Why are you interpreting it as an emasculating remark?

 

Innocent ignorance is still ignorance.

 

Yes but it IS innocent. There's no malice in it. They often go hand in hand, ignorance and malice, but not in this case.

[Madrict]

Haha they just covered his nip! Teasers!

[devSin]

I'm in a conundrummy hat. I reallly wanna hang out on the Dorian thread BUT I am terrified of seeing more spoilers about his personality and backstory... AAAHH~ I'm thinking when the reviews start piling out, Imma have to be outta here

Yeah, the reviews are going to drop next week, and then the early access a couple days later.

I'm lucky enough that I read so selectively that I don't even see most spoilers, but I've been tuning out a lot more recently and skipping a lot of the conversations. I haven't decided if I'll just leave next week or stick around and hope I don't stumble on to anything too major.
 

They are simply describing him. This is no different than calling him a Tevinter...

Yes, it is.

Dorian is not the "gay mage" any more than Vivienne is the "black mage" or Cassandra is the "butch warrior".

He's one of the mages in the party, and he's gay. One is not a qualifier of the other, and it's demeaning to attempt to distinguish him that way.

That doesn't mean the interviewer is a bad person or that nobody understands what was intended, but it's not wrong to point out that the phrase used was unfortunate.

[Fredward]

Dorian is not the "gay mage" any more than Vivienne is the "black mage" or Cassandra is the "butch warrior".

 

Well butch is subjective but Dorian IS gay and Vivienne IS black. Why is it offensive to call them such? Especially when you want to distinguish them from the other mages? Would calling Vivienne the female mage then have been less offensive? To me it almost seems more offensive that these things should be whitewashed like they're some kind of bad word, as if they're not supposed to be spoken of aloud. I honestly do not get it.

[Lucy Glitter]

Yeah, the reviews are going to drop next week, and then the early access a couple days later.

I'm lucky enough that I read so selectively that I don't even see most spoilers, but I've been tuning out a lot more recently and skipping a lot of the conversations. I haven't decided if I'll just leave next week or stick around and hope I don't stumble on to anything too major.
 

*snip*

 

It's next week?! *sobs*

 

I guess I will have to ban myself from the BSN until I get to play it... life is **** right now, guys.

 

But I promise when I first meet him I will run on here to gif spam my reaction.

[(Disgusted noise.)]

Well butch is subjective but Dorian IS gay and Vivienne IS black. Why is it offensive to call them such? Especially when you want to distinguish them from the other mages? Would calling Vivienne the female mage then have been less offensive? To me it almost seems more offensive that these things should be whitewashed like they're some kind of bad word, as if they're not supposed to be spoken of aloud. I honestly do not get it.

It is bad because that sort of language reinforces privilege. Straight people and white people are rarely referred to as straight or white when we're talking about an individual. They're just people. As I mentioned earlier, no one would referred to Blackwall as "the straight warden" and likewise no one would refer to Cullen as "the white templar" because we subconsciously think of these things as obvious or redundancies, so they just get to be people. Whereas you're always a gay person or a black person, ect. While acknowledgement and visibility is important, your minority status is not your only defining characteristic and to constantly be referred to by it is incredibly demeaning.

[ElitePinecone]

This is a pretty divisive topic.

 

I don't think the interviewer meant any harm in saying what he did, and I also don't think there's much to gain by talking about it at length.

 

Mike seemed pretty quick to refute the idea that Dorian was a one-note character, even though I don't think that was the intended tone of the question.

[Fredward]

It is bad because that sort of language reinforces privilege. Straight people and white people are rarely referred to as straight or white when we're talking about an individual. They're just people. As I mentioned earlier, no one would referred to Blackwall as "the straight warden" and likewise no one would refer to Cullen as "the white templar" because we subconsciously think of these things as obvious or redundancies, so they just get to be people. Whereas you're always a gay person or a black person, ect. While acknowledgement and visibility is important, your minority status is not your only defining characteristic and to constantly be referred to by it is incredibly demeaning.

 

But that's relative. Blackwall would be the 'white guy' if the majority was black. he's still probably the 'bearded guy' to most people. It's not a thing straight or white people do to minorities it's what any dominant group would do the a minority. Nor do I think it is INHERENTLY demeaning to be referred to by your minority status, if that is ALL you were then yes that's an obvious problem but simply being referred to as such? Is that automatically a sign that a person considers you to be only that? Especially in these cases where it seems to have been used SPECIFICALLY to distinguish.

[pastabender]

But that's relative. Blackwall would be the 'white guy' if the majority was black. he's still probably the 'bearded guy' to most people. It's not a thing straight or white people do to minorities it's what any dominant group would do the a minority. Nor do I think it is INHERENTLY demeaning to be referred to by your minority status, if that is ALL you were then yes that's an obvious problem but simply being referred to as such? Is that automatically a sign that a person considers you to be only that? Especially in these cases where it seems to have been used SPECIFICALLY to distinguish.

Are you a minority? If not, please don't tell minorities how and what they should feel, or whether something is demeaning, if you haven't experienced it. 

 

(EDIT: Not saying you can't have your views etc. but try to realise that you do not know what it's like and shouldn't try to in order to further your opinion (which isn't a bad thing or your fault), and take those opinions of the people who it does affect before coming up with a conclusion/opinion, because they definitely have the primary data)

[Gothfather]

No offense, but that is crap.

 

Of course the words have more meaning than they were meant to have. I'm sure the interviewer didn't intend it as an emasculating remark. But that in itself is a problem. Innocent ignorance is still ignorance.

 

What are the most central descriptors that can be ascribed to Dorian based on what we know?

 

He's a mage.

He's from Tevinter.

He has dark hair and a rather distinctive mustache.

He's gay.

 

So why does the default descriptor tend to be "the gay mage"? Why do developers have to go out of their way to explain that the character has traits more important than their sexuality? And why, as far as I'm willing to bet, will "gay" continue to be the dominant descriptor used in reference to Dorian even once we've learned all about his story and character?

 

Once it was learned that he was gay the fact that he's from Tevinter or he has an incredibly unique mustache go out the window. Even when one of those qualities is as much of or more of a topic of general conversation (referring to his mustache, of course). If no one knew he was gay, people would still be using his mustache (or the fact that he's from Tevinter, which is easily the most interesting thing about him) as the primary way to identify him and we'd be all the merrier.

 

Anyway, not trying to come off as standoffish in case it reads that way. Can be hard to tell in text.

There something else I think bares considering..

One of the things you want an interview to do is inform the ignorant and by ignorant i simply mean people who have no idea about DA:I or even Dragon age in general. In an interview, Inquisition executive producer Mark Darrahtalks about how people can try an franchised game for teh first time "Now suddenly you have 15 million people that have basically had the first RPG they've ever played as Skyrim. They have totally different expectations of what storytelling is, what exploration is, and I think exploration is really where we've seen the biggest change. " So it can't be assumed people know anything about DA:I just because they are reading an Interview of the game.

 

So gay men now have a gay romance option not the first M/M romance option avialable but the first gay male romance option. This something the public should be told. Many of those readers are not going to know anything about Tevinter. Saying the "tevinter mage" is a useless description to people who don't know DA, it only informs people familiar with DA anything about him and doesn't let the world know "hey dragon age has a gay male representation in their game." There are only so many words a writer is given for an article, when you write you try to present as much information with the fewest words. I am sure we have all see varric described as the Dwarf archer or dwarf rogue. He's more than his race and job, but those two words do wonders to describe him.  What is more important to inform the world about that there is a human mage in the game? Or that there is a gay mage in the game? I think, others may disagree, but I think its more important to inform the uninformed that BioWare has a gay companion in the game. I think 4 games down the line where Bioware has had gay romance options in each of their games there might be cause for concern that companions are just being defined by their sexuality. However the first I think deserves to have their sexuality singled out because it is a step forward and people should be told. I think the context of dorian being the first means his sexuality is perhaps the most important thing about him outside the game. Inside the game his sexuality is just one of many things that shapes who he is but outside it is rather important.

 

 

 

[source] http://www.gamespot.com/articles/dragon-age-inquisition-began-as-a-multiplayer-only/1100-6423362/

[Tevinter Soldier]

It is bad because that sort of language reinforces privilege. Straight people and white people are rarely referred to as straight or white when we're talking about an individual. They're just people. As I mentioned earlier, no one would referred to Blackwall as "the straight warden" and likewise no one would refer to Cullen as "the white templar" because we subconsciously think of these things as obvious or redundancies, so they just get to be people. Whereas you're always a gay person or a black person, ect. While acknowledgement and visibility is important, your minority status is not your only defining characteristic and to constantly be referred to by it is incredibly demeaning.

 

it's not so much privilege as identifying maker "what stands out"

the fact is even in this thread once he was announced as gay this thread has been mostly about being gay not being from tevinter and this thread is his most hardcore supporter base.

 

but let's backtrack in the beginning it was his moustache that singled him out then it was being from tevinter. then finally that he was gay. you can't blame a guy for referring to him as "the gay mage" when dorians on supporters focus on that very fact and this thread is proof of that.

 

just as vivienne would be referred to as the black mage because the majority of people in the game are white. (and i dissagree, most people focus on her politics because a black woman isn't all that defining any more)

most people refer to blackwall as "the beard" because its what sets him apart.

 

people don't call cullen the white templar because the majority of what we've seen is white templars.

people call cullen "the dick", because he's attitude is his most defining thing.

 

if the majority of the cast was black and cullen was the stand alone white templar it would be "cullens the white dude"

When Dorians supporters in general stop caring that he's gay and obsessing about romance with him, then the reputation of the character will grow.

 

and it's the same for every bioware character the hardcore fans care more about sexuality then they do the character (and frankly its scary) you can't blame an interview for picking up on that and talking about it. Dorian get's singled out because his supporters focus on it way more then anything else.

 

a stark contrast with the iron Iron bull's also gay or is it bi?, where some have focused on the his sexuality but most people care more about the fact that bull is a giant arse kicking bad arse who doesn't take no **** from nobody. and that is largely because he's massive has an eye patch horns and a giant sword. his sexuality is secondary. If you want people to stop focusing on the fact dorian is gay don't make a song and dance about it, instead focus on the other aspects of who he is and it will grow organicly.

[pastabender]

I don't think the argument is that the interviewer shouldn't have mentioned that Dorian was gay, it's just the way it was phrased. Something like "And you have the first fully-fledged gay character in the series, Dorian right?" would have been better if the question was intended to reinforce that point (which is worth bringing up). But labelling someone as "the gay - " is just not the right way to go about it in this day and age, and the reasons why have been expressed above.

 

Of course, the interviewer probably intended none of this, and doesn't even realise, and that is totally fine. No one is saying he should be sacked or anything like that or that he is a bad person. It is just part of a bigger issue which I think awareness is important in.