Ce sujet est fermé
There is one gay companion and one lesbian companion. That's not "over-representation." If you don't know at least one gay man and lesbian woman in your life, well... I'm afraid you don't know as much about your friends and co-workers as you think you do.
I don't know. If someone is very shy and thus doesn't have much of a social circle, it is possible that they don't know anyone who is homosexual.
It depends on where a person lives. From someone who lives in San Francisco to someone in some shithole in the American South or a person in Western Europe and a person from some Eastern Orthodox Potemkin village in Eastern Europe, the answers would be different, I would expect.There is one gay companion and one lesbian companion. That's not "over-representation." If you don't know at least one gay man and lesbian woman in your life, well... I'm afraid you don't know as much about your friends and co-workers as you think you do.
"Squeaky wheels get the KICK!" - Minsc.
Then it's as I said, they just don't know as much about their friends as they think they doIt depends on where a person lives. From someone who lives in San Francisco to someone in some shithole in the American South or a person in Western Europe and a person from some Eastern Orthodox Potemkin village in Eastern Europe, the answers would be different, I would expect.
I don't know. If someone is very shy and thus doesn't have much of a social circle, it is possible that they don't know anyone who is homosexual.
I don't have any friends, and even I know three gay men and one bisexual woman 
There is one gay companion and one lesbian companion. That's not "over-representation." If you don't know at least one gay man and lesbian woman in your life, well... I'm afraid you don't know as much about your friends and co-workers as you think you do.
This is very creative quoting I have to say. It is accurate that I used "over-representation" a few times but it would be even more accurate to say that I always used the words "disproportional over-representation".
p is the percentage of straight (S) people, so (100-p) is the percentage of non-S people
N is the total number of LIs
n is the total number of S LIs, so (N-n) is the total number of non-S LIs
Proportional representation means that 'n' should minimize the absolute value of (n/N - p/100) or the absolute value of ((N-n)/N - (100-p)/100). Let's say that 90 percent of the player base is straight, so
1 LI -> no non-S LI
2 LIs -> no non-S LI
3 LIs -> no non-S LI
4 LIs -> no non-S LI
5 LIs -> no non-S LI or 1 non-S LI (both yield a value of 0.1)
6 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
7 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
8 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
9 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
10 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
11 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
12 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
13 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
14 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
15 LIs -> 1 non-S LI or 2 non-S LIs (both yield a value of 1/30)
16 LIs -> 2 non-S LIs ...
Unless I'm terribly wrong, what you want IS disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. So no need to assume anything about me for simply stating a fact .
This is very creative quoting I have to say. It is accurate that I used "over-representation" a few times but it would be even more accurate to say that I always used the words "disproportional over-representation".
p is the percentage of straight (S) people, so (100-p) is the percentage of non-S people
N is the total number of LIs
n is the total number of S LIs, so (N-n) is the total number of non-S LIs
Proportional representation means that 'n' should minimize the absolute value of (n/N - p/100) or the absolute value of ((N-n)/N - (100-p)/100). Let's say that 90 percent of the player base is straight, so
*snip*
Unless I'm terribly wrong, what you want IS disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. So no need to assume anything about me for simply stating a fact
I've got two questions for you
Is 90% of the player base straight? Statistics on the population of gay people are hard to get because there is still a lot of fear about coming out
Even if 90% of the player base is straight is it not of benefit to society and humanity as a whole to include positive examples of minority populations in media? This exposes people to a point of view that they may not have the chance to experience in real life and could help reduce hatred, fear or intolerance of these groups.
Besides, as I said before, if we're only including characters that reflect the majority of the human race then all characters would be Chinese men
Unless I'm terribly wrong, what you want IS disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. So no need to assume anything about me for simply stating a fact
I really don't understand why you're still harping on about a single game that may or may not have more LGBT representation than exists in the playerbase when most games have no LGBT content at all. By itself, the fact that this discussion is still going on should tell you that there is a problem with LGBT representation in games and wider media. Maybe you should ask yourself why you care about this so much.
I've got two questions for you
Is 90% of the player base straight? Statistics on the population of gay people are hard to get because there is still a lot of fear about coming out
Even if 90% of the player base is straight is it not of benefit to society and humanity as a whole to include positive examples of minority populations in media? This exposes people to a point of view that they may not have the chance to experience in real life and could help reduce hatred, fear or intolerance of these groups.
Besides, as I said before, if we're only including characters that reflect the majority of the human race then all characters would be Chinese men
Mostly you hear people say that it is about 95 percent but I guess it is probably less so I took 90. To indicate that I don't know the exact figure I said "Let's say that ... ". Either way it doesn't matter that much. Even if it is 75, it still turns out that you ask for disproportional over-representation of LGBT people.
Your second question implies that I have said that minorities shouldn't be represented and I really can't see where I have done that.
Mostly you hear people say that it is about 95 percent but I guess it is probably less so I took 90. To indicate that I don't know the exact figure I said "Let's say that ... ". Either way it doesn't matter that much. Even if it is 75, it still turns out that you ask for disproportional over-representation of LGBT people.
Your second question implies that I have said that minorities shouldn't be represented and I really can't see where I have done that.
I've never seen any real statistics around this number and I find that the people who say that 95% of gamers are straight, are straight gamers trying to explain why there shouldn't be any LGBT representation in games so I was wondering were your numbers were coming from.
Your use of the phrases 'disproportional' and 'over representation' implies that you think that you think there are too many LGBT characters in games or that people asking for more are asking for too much.
If this is not what you think, then I apologise for making this assumption but it is what you're language implies.
My point is that even if 90% or 95% of gamers are straight, it benefits society to have less then 90% or 95% straight characters in media, because it exposes people to views and experiences outside of what they'd normally experience. It avoids the damaging affects of always being surrounded by people who think & believe the same things as you.
It also adds to possible role playing opportunities and gives players choices, which is generally a good thing.
That is the crux of my question, do you think that minority population groups should only be added to media in the exact proportion that they exist in real life?
Mostly you hear people say that it is about 95 percent but I guess it is probably less so I took 90. To indicate that I don't know the exact figure I said "Let's say that ... ". Either way it doesn't matter that much. Even if it is 75, it still turns out that you ask for disproportional over-representation of LGBT people.
Your second question implies that I have said that minorities shouldn't be represented and I really can't see where I have done that.
I would prefer it if games on average had a proportional representation of LGBT people (allowing for some game to game variation as a story might dictate), but they don't. So in a world where most games have zero LGBT representation, I would support a game that had disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. Just as I would be in favour of a film or a game which had a disproportional over-representation of some ethnic minorities who also never get much representation in mainstream media.
I don't see how this issue can be simplified any further.
I really don't understand why you're still harping on about a single game that may or may not have more LGBT representation than exists in the playerbase when most games have no LGBT content at all. By itself, the fact that this discussion is still going on should tell you that there is a problem with LGBT representation in games and wider media. Maybe you should ask yourself why you care about this so much.
But I don't care about LGBT LIs at all. I don't care if they implement LIs like in DAO, like DA2 or like DAI. I can see why some people would say that in their opinion DAO's implementation is fair, why some people would say that in their opinion DA2's implementation is fair and why some people would say that in their opinion DAI's implementation is fair. I can't see how anybody can say that a particular distribution IS fair. 'fair', 'equal treatment', ... there is nothing objective about it in this context and as such can't be used to justify any distribution nor can it be used as an argument for any distribution.
I also fail to see why the lack of representation in the wider media is an argument at all. On its own it is completely irrelevant. It's like someone asking for a donation for charity who says "you should consider giving money because nobody in your street has donated anything". It's not an argument because it isn't my job to compensate for what others have done or not done. If he would say "we would really appreciate a donation because we haven't collected much yet", that is an argument to give money or more money than you initially intended to give. The fact that nobody in my street has given anything contributes to the fact that not much has been collected yet. It matters only indirectly.
But I don't care about LGBT LIs at all. I don't care if they implement LIs like in DAO, like DA2 or like DAI. I can see why some people would say that in their opinion DAO's implementation is fair, why some people would say that in their opinion DA2's implementation is fair and why some people would say that in their opinion DAI's implementation is fair. I can't see how anybody can say that a particular distribution IS fair. 'fair', 'equal treatment', ... there is nothing objective about it in this context and as such can't be used to justify any distribution nor can it be used as an argument for any distribution.
I also fail to see why the lack of representation in the wider media is an argument at all. On its own it is completely irrelevant. It's like someone asking for a donation for charity who says "you should consider giving money because nobody in your street has donated anything". It's not an argument because it isn't my job to compensate for what others have done or not done. If he would say "we would really appreciate a donation because we haven't collected much yet", that is an argument to give money or more money than you initially intended to give. The fact that nobody in my street has given anything contributes to the fact that not much has been collected yet. It matters only indirectly.
I've gone back through your old posts to try and figure out what your position _is_, because recently you've mostly be saying what it _isn't_.
On 22nd August you said this:
' I really can't see why one group should have more right to ask for representation than the other. Left handed people asking for proportional representation is identical to non-straight people asking for proportional representation.'
Ultimately this comes down to your position on social justice. It is at its most fundamental level an issue of morality. You state that over or under-representation is the same for you regardless of the group, be they ethnic minority, gay, bisexual, transgender. By stating that you are saying that context is unimportant to your decision making process. That you do not see social justice as your concern. Just because a group has been treated badly in the past does not mean we should make any attempt at reparation. No, we can simply move to treating them equally and forgetting everything that has gone on before. If they are unable to let go of the past, then that is their problem.
I'm just taking your line of thinking to its logical conclusion. You're not alone in your views. Many right wing politicians espouse them on a regular basis. I disagree, but ultimately I respect your right to hold that opinion... as long as you don't stop me from getting games stuffed to the gunwales with ethnic minority, gay, bisexual and transgender characters in it.
I think the term getting confused here is 'fair'.
1) LarryDavid seems to be using it in a sense close to 'realistic'. And it's true that as a sample set of 9ish random strangers, non-heterosexual sexualities are over-represented in Bioware LI's.
2) The sense others seems to be using it is 'fair on all players'. For example, if the straight Inquisitors have 5-6 LI options, while gay Inquisitors have only 1-2, then that isn't 'fair' because it isn't equal between the two.
If we want to decide between the two, then let's simply ask: if something is 'unfair', then who is it unfair on?
Going by the second definition, there is a tangible answer. It is unfair on the gay players (or players who want to play gay Inquisitors, at least). They really do have fewer options. That's just a fact.
Going by the first definition, it's hard to see any victims at all. So what if gay/bi LI's are over-represented? Who loses out? Who is this 'unfair' on? Surely only people who don't want gay players to have as many LI options as them.
Which is when words such as 'privilege' and 'bigotry' start to creep into the conversation...
I don't know. If someone is very shy and thus doesn't have much of a social circle, it is possible that they don't know anyone who is homosexual.
It depends on where a person lives. From someone who lives in San Francisco to someone in some shithole in the American South or a person in Western Europe and a person from some Eastern Orthodox Potemkin village in Eastern Europe, the answers would be different, I would expect.
I can guarantee you that there are people who have met me and some who know me fairly casually, but beyond a single meeting, who do not think I am gay. If they were to make a statement like, "I don't know anyone who is gay", they would be wrong. Why? Because they do. Just because I haven't discussed my sexuality with them doesn't mean that they don't still know a gay person. If the population of LGBT people is about 5-10%, then it stands to reason that the population is about that (give or take a few percentage points) consistently around the world. Yes, there will be some areas where there are less gay people (most likely because of intolerance and homophobia) and some where there are more (most likely in liberal urban cities), but it's pretty safe to say that the idea that "no one around me is gay" is a falsehood and that the people saying don't know that they don't know the sexuality of some of their friends, family members, co-workers, or acquaintances.
This is very creative quoting I have to say. It is accurate that I used "over-representation" a few times but it would be even more accurate to say that I always used the words "disproportional over-representation".
p is the percentage of straight (S) people, so (100-p) is the percentage of non-S people
N is the total number of LIs
n is the total number of S LIs, so (N-n) is the total number of non-S LIs
Proportional representation means that 'n' should minimize the absolute value of (n/N - p/100) or the absolute value of ((N-n)/N - (100-p)/100). Let's say that 90 percent of the player base is straight, so
1 LI -> no non-S LI
2 LIs -> no non-S LI
3 LIs -> no non-S LI
4 LIs -> no non-S LI
5 LIs -> no non-S LI or 1 non-S LI (both yield a value of 0.1)
6 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
7 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
8 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
9 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
10 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
11 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
12 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
13 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
14 LIs -> 1 non-S LI
15 LIs -> 1 non-S LI or 2 non-S LIs (both yield a value of 1/30)
16 LIs -> 2 non-S LIs ...
Unless I'm terribly wrong, what you want IS disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. So no need to assume anything about me for simply stating a fact
Bioware has already stated that because the N is so low for any given game, they are not concerned with a "realistic" representation of LGB people. Allan has stated that in numerous posts and I believe David has as well. They want to offer all players choice, which means that in any given game, there will have to be options for both gay men and lesbian women. If there are only going to be 4-8 romances, it means that there needs to be at least 50% of the characters who are LGB in order to offer that choice to all players. This is their stance. It's not going to change.
The important number missing is 65% which is the number of queer folks who are heroic. I'm amazed no one has mentioned this so far. Of all heroes 65% (sorry I picked the lowball figure) are queer, therefore we are vastly underrepresented in heroic media.
Yes, there will be some areas where there are less gay people (most likely because of intolerance and homophobia) and some where there are more (most likely in liberal urban cities), but it's pretty safe to say that the idea that "no one around me is gay" is a falsehood and that the people saying don't know that they don't know the sexuality of some of their friends, family members, co-workers, or acquaintances.
Right, that's exactly what I said 
So us white people and middle aged people are disproportionately over represented.
If you're going to complain about one thing being over represented why not others?
*snort* Oh, but then you get the "Thedas is medieval Europe; therefore there should be no black people!!!!!" arguments You can't win with these kinds of folks.
*snort* Oh, but then you get the "Thedas is medieval Europe; therefore there should be no black people!!!!!" arguments
Yup! Try explaining that to the "no black people in Thedas" folks though. Or you could try having a conversation with a brick wall; might get more intelligent feedback
I don't know. If someone is very shy and thus doesn't have much of a social circle, it is possible that they don't know anyone who is homosexual.
This is very creative quoting I have to say. It is accurate that I used "over-representation" a few times but it would be even more accurate to say that I always used the words "disproportional over-representation".
<snip>
Unless I'm terribly wrong, what you want IS disproportional over-representation of LGBT people. So no need to assume anything about me for simply stating a fact
I think we are using different standards of the word 'know'. Some use it only when they have a connection to that person while others use it for people they just know the name and face of due to living in the same area.
And if we go by how the Bible uses the word 'know', then people can easily say they don't know any homosexuals.
That is the crux of my question, do you think that minority population groups should only be added to media in the exact proportion that they exist in real life?
No.
Retour en haut
