1820 réponses à ce sujet

[God]

You've spent multiple pages on this thread whinging that straight men get the shortest end of the stick, when they have the exact same number of options as gay women and gay men - two. You implied that straight men had it the worse in terms of "exclusivity" because there's only one straight woman (as if a bisexual romance LI is somehow less satisfying), completely ignoring that there's also only one gale male and one lesbian.

 

Are you too self-absorbed to count things that don't concern you or are you simply convinced that being a straight guy automatically entitles you to more than what anyone else has, and anyone who says otherwise is trying to be "more equal" (pardon me while I facepalm that bit)? Or perhaps this is all just a poor attempt at trolling, which would give me some hope that this thread isn't as ridiculous as it reads. 

 

+1 for putting 'straight guy', 'self-absorbed', and 'entitled' into one sentence!

 

Yeah, I'm totally a member of the heterosexual patriarchy out to keep everyone else in there place. You got me!

[Monica21]

I'm not saying this is about rights or equality. Plenty of other people did. In fact, I said nothing about rights or equality or how I felt. All I'm saying is that I'm noticing a double standard from the SJW/LGBT audience in how they react and interact with people who post different opinions to them. I'm making no statement on how I feel on the issue, and indeed, I'm really refraining from making an stance. As I've tried to explain, I'm just calling out a double standard that exists where the ideology and feedback of some people is attacked because of what's in the content of their message rather than the intent of their meaning, which is functionally similar to what everyone else (who aren't getting attacked) is saying.

 

I can't help but feel you're shoe-horning an opinion onto me, just so you can be apprehensive towards it (or being intentionally misrepresentative of my point). I'll clarify my statement again, this time with more bluntness:

 

Some people give critique, complaints, or feedback on the games, they're attacked. Others do the same exact thing (altering only the content of their message), and they're hailed as a righteous crusader (or more likely some much less grandiose but still appreciative value). A double standard exists, and people here are indulging in it.

 

When you use words like "more equal" then yes, you are talking about rights and equality. And really, if there were just straight LI options in the game I'd probably call bull**** on Bioware and think it sucked to give people who are gay/bi/lesbian zero options, but it still wouldn't have anything to do with "rights." Again, no one is denying anyone their basic human rights. There is a company that decided how to proceed with romance options and (surprise!) they don't satisfy everyone. Guess what? I wasn't satisfied with the Origins and DA2 options (except for Isabela who is so blatantly sexual with her soft, pillowy bosoms that it kind of did make me wonder if I was headed toward that 3 on the Kinsey scale) but no one cared. As a straight female gamer who usually plays straight female characters, this is the first Bioware game I've played where I love my main romance options.

 

I'm not at all the shoe-horning type, so what is it you think I'm saying?

[Laurelinde]

You don't have to be a moustache-twirling hateful villain to end up supporting a status quo that perpetuates inequality.  I am white.  I am trying my best not to be a racist person.  But I acknowledge that I live and exist in a culture which privileges or prioritises me (not in any sense of having been born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and definitely not in a sense that I have never experienced suffering and my life is perfect) over people of color.  For example, with my 'white' name, I have a greater likelihood of being called for job interviews than someone with a similar CV and an 'ethnic' name.  There is no political party in my country trying to force or 'politely encourage' me to go back where I came from, even though I'm an immigrant, because I'm the right color.  Until I open my mouth, people assume I am native, whereas I caught myself worrying that my endocrinologist would not speak English well because of his surname, when in fact, when I met him, he was very clearly born and bred here, and had an accent like the then-Prime Minister.  (Boy did I feel foolish.)

 

Qunquistador's point is sound, IMO: straight male characters have no fewer options than gay characters or lesbian characters.  Most Bioware, and other RPGs that I can think of, have not had a perfect split of romance options between all gender, race and sexuality combinations.  In this particular game, straight female characters of certain races happen to get extra, with most people having an equal two options.  Why is that situation so intolerable?

 

Asking for more is fine, honestly, but it shouldn't be a given just because that's always or usually how it was in the past.  As a certain fictional FBI agent said, question everything.  But this thread has come up so many times that it's hard, after a certain point, not to just think, 'live with it' - everyone else has had to at one point or another.

[God]

When you use words like "more equal" then yes, you are talking about rights and equality. And really, if there were just straight LI options in the game I'd probably call bull**** on Bioware and think it sucked to give people who are gay/bi/lesbian zero options, but it still wouldn't have anything to do with "rights." Again, no one is denying anyone their basic human rights. There is a company that decided how to proceed with romance options and (surprise!) they don't satisfy everyone. Guess what? I wasn't satisfied with the Origins and DA2 options (except for Isabela who is so blatantly sexual with her soft, pillowy bosoms that it kind of did make me wonder if I was headed toward that 3 on the Kinsey scale) but no one cared. As a straight female gamer who usually plays straight female characters, this is the first Bioware game I've played where I love my main romance options.

 

I'm not at all the shoe-horning type, so what is it you think I'm saying?

 

I think you're totally not getting what I'm saying.

 

I'm not talking about rights. I'm not talking about equality. I'm not talking about sociopolitical issues in video games and how they reflect on society as a whole.

 

I'm talking about opinions. And how certain opinions on here about certain aspects of the game are held to be 'more valid'. 

 

I am of course talking about Social Justice Crusaders. I'm talking about double standards that exist in the argumentative process. I'm not talking about the beliefs, stances, or ideology behind anyone on here at all, or anything relating to the actual game content.

 

And I'm not much more than a bemused fella whose just trying to point out that equal consideration isn't so equal in practice, especially here.

 

OP talks about his opinion. OP gets attacked or mocked for holding said opinion. Yet sans some details with the content, many made the same argument before and weren't attacked for it. They were lauded. I understand and even agree with the argument that this opinion has been repeated ad nauseum. 

 

I'm just here to show people where the faulty line is made in that. Amusedly so I suppose.

 

As for the shoe-horning statement, I think you're ascribing a mentality/opinion to me that I don't hold nor care to go into detail on. If anything, I'm more of (to repeat myself) a bemused fella whose not going to make a statement out of apathetic neutrality to the issue while trying to dissect the logical arguments made by either side.

[Qunquistador]

+1 for putting 'straight guy', 'self-absorbed', and 'entitled' into one sentence!

 

Yeah, I'm totally a member of the heterosexual patriarchy out to keep everyone else in there place. You got me!

Well, to be fair, you mentioned that you were a straight male. And can you blame me for thinking someone with a handle like G-d is self-absorbed? Let's not forget your posting post after post about straight guys and only straight guys being short changed by having the same number of options as two other groups.

 

If you were gay I'd say the same thing, rest assured.

[God]

Well, to be fair, you mentioned that you were a straight male. And can you blame me for thinking someone with a handle like G-d is self-absorbed? Let's not forget your posting post after post about straight guys and only straight guys being short changed by having the same number of options as two other groups.

 

If you were gay I'd say the same thing, rest assured.

 

Read above post on this issue. Me being a straight male doesn't give you an excuse to hand me an opinion and tell me that's what I believe. 

 

I wouldn't think anyone calling himself God on a forum was self-absorbed. If anything, it shows how laid-back and irreverent I usually am. Plus it's a source of cheap laughs. 

 

People are so uptight.

[Laurelinde]

I think you're totally blowing this out of proportion.

 

I'm not talking about rights either.

 

I'm talking about opinions. And how certain opinions on here about certain aspects of the game are held to be 'more valid'. 

 

I am of course talking about Social Justice Crusaders. I'm talking about double standards that exist in the argumentative process.

 

And I'm not much more than a bemused fella whose just trying to point out that equal consideration isn't so equal in practice, especially here.

 

OP talks about his opinion. OP gets attacked or mocked for holding said opinion. Yet sans some details with the content, many made the same argument before and weren't attacked for it. They were lauded. 

 

I'm just here to show people where the faulty line is made in that. Amusedly so I suppose.

 

Could it be because the so-called Social Justice Warriors are looking at things on a more macro level, and acknowledging that we are not coming from a starting point where things are currently equal for everyone in the world?

 

For me, equality long-term will mean that currently under-represented groups will have better and more adequate representation, but it will not necessarily mean that every individual piece of media will be split precisely along demographic lines.  A game set in a monastery in medieval Tibet, for example, is not likely to have a whole lot of female or white characters.  A movie about Magdalen sisters in Ireland is likely to have mostly white female characters.  And a book set in a fantasy version of a great ancient African kingdom is likely to have mostly black characters.  That's all fine.  The point is that there should be room for all of them, instead of the same people's stories being told over and over again.  And in a character-based RPG like Dragon Age, the writers clearly want to find a situation where all different kinds of players can roleplay a wide variety of characters of all kinds of differing backgrounds and attitudes, some of which will reflect their own real-life circumstances or personalities.

 

Basically, other people having options, even more options, doesn't necessarily translate exactly to "default" groups being shafted.

[Maverick827]

Naah. People are just tired of what many of these white straight male gamers company their complains with. I would have no problem if people were just genuinely sad that some character are gated from them (=Sera) or they aren't attracted to their options. But when it goes to sexist comments on how ugly Cassandra and Josie are, how unsexy they are, how they don't want to romance character who is bisexual (there is some like this, they only romance straight female characters), how entitled they are to get more than anyone, how they simply regard that lesbian and gay PC has same options than them, how they make these "homosexual agenda" threads..
 
There is nothing unfair in. getting less options in one game. If this was repeating patter like it's usually is for straight female/gay/lesbian PC's then it'd be unfair but luckily that's not case in DA series unlike it is in most games. At least you got 2 sure options to choose form, same can't be said on notorious ME3 straight female romances. And even more unfair is that there is no gay LI until ME3.

Not finding someone attractive is not sexist.

[Liveshiptrader]

Could it be because the so-called Social Justice Warriors are looking at things on a more macro level, and acknowledging that we are not coming from a starting point where things are currently equal for everyone in the world?

 

 

Equality has nothing to do with it. Where not talking about food stores here and ensuring that everyone gets an equal portion, where talking about an entertainment product. 

 

If it appeals to you good, if it doesn't oh well move on to the product that does, if your interest doesn't have enough people to make that product viable then that's just bad luck.

[God]

Eh, first world problems, what can you do?

 

Forgive this haughty social darwinist.

[luna1124]

Blackwall, Cullen, Solas, Sera

For me there is only one choice. Why can't Blackwall look like Dorian?????? Why is Dorian gorgeous but off limits to female Quizzy's????

[Laurelinde]

Equality has nothing to do with it. Where not talking about food stores here and ensuring that everyone gets an equal portion, where talking about an entertainment product. 

 

If it appeals to you good, if it doesn't oh well move on to the product that does, if your interest doesn't have enough people to make that product viable then that's just bad luck.

 

...right.  So, go on and aim that sentiment at the OP then?  Perhaps a game with only male protagonists would be more to his/her interest.

[God]

Blackwall, Cullen, Solas, Sera

For me there is only one choice. Why can't Blackwall look like Dorian?????? Why is Dorian gorgeous but off limits to female Quizzy's????

Liked not for the post, but for the sig.

 

+5

[God]

...right.  So, go on and aim that sentiment at the OP then?  Perhaps a game with only male protagonists would be more to his/her interest.

 

Because it's being aimed at everyone. Not just the OP. 

 

Of course, if I were to say what you say should be told to the OP to someone (you for example) about DA2 or ME3 3 or 4 years ago, I'd get relentlessly attacked, criticized, or mocked.

 

I'm just pointing out the double standard logic here. Nothing more. See what I'm saying?

 

Once again, no sociopolitical statement. Just an observation of logic in argumentation.

[Liveshiptrader]

...right.  So, go on and aim that sentiment at the OP then?  Perhaps a game with only male protagonists would be more to his/her interest.

 

I am pretty sure we all know what we want so what a silly request to make. 

[Laurelinde]

Because it's being aimed at everyone. Not just the OP. 

 

Of course, if I were to say what you say should be told to the OP to someone (you for example) about DA2 or ME3 3 or 4 years ago, I'd get relentlessly attacked, criticized, or mocked.

 

I'm just pointing out the double standard logic here. Nothing more. See what I'm saying?

 

Once again, no sociopolitical statement. Just an observation of logic in argumentation.

 

And I'm just pointing out, again, that the situations are not necessarily comparable, because outside of Bioware, the options for non-white, non-male, non-straight gamers to play a protagonist who represents them is considerably more limited.  If I take an inveterate carnivore to a vegetarian restaurant, I can hardly tell them 'well just order something else you like' if the whole menu is things they don't like (not the best analogy, but you get my point.)

 

Not to mention, upholding the status quo is every bit as sociopolitical as challenging it.  Even an argument purely about logic carries political weight, in this context, because it's taking place in a political framework (which virtually everything in life does, honestly - our actions and beliefs shape our society, because none of us is an island unto themself.)

 

I am pretty sure we all know what we want so what a silly request to make. 

 

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by this.  How does 'if you don't like the options presented to you in DA:I, you are free to play another game' not apply to the OP?

[Liveshiptrader]

 

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by this.  How does 'if you don't like the options presented to you in DA:I, you are free to play another game' not apply to the OP?

 

The OP can but where did I say that he couldn't also voice his opinion on this one? 

[Liveshiptrader]

And I'm just pointing out, again, that the situations are not necessarily comparable, because outside of Bioware, the options for non-white, non-male, non-straight gamers to play a protagonist who represents them is considerably more limited.  If I take an inveterate carnivore to a vegetarian restaurant, I can hardly tell them 'well just order something else you like' if the whole menu is things they don't like (not the best analogy, but you get my point.)

 

Not to mention, upholding the status quo is every bit as sociopolitical as challenging it.  Even an argument purely about logic carries political weight, in this context, because it's taking place in a political framework (which virtually everything in life does, honestly - our actions and beliefs shape our society, because none of us is an island unto themself.)

 

 

Then the carnivore doesn't enjoy himself at the restaurant and it was silly of you to take him there, if there is a limited selection of restaurants for his tastes it's not because people are against the carnivore it's because Chefs may simply prefer to cook vegetarian and there is a larger amount of vegetarian customers.

 

The carnivore could let people be aware of his tastes and chefs may have similar tastes or just see it as viable on the market and other carnivores may be around in enough numbers to support those tastes.

 

Hopefully the carnivore isn't a d*ck who goes around trying to shame the vegetarians

[Panda]

Not finding someone attractive is not sexist.

 

Calling character "lady manhands", "ugly", saying that female characters should not have scars, moles, short hair, strong jaws etc. is. 

 

EDIT: Also I said that I wouldn't have problem if someone just simply wouldn't find LI attractive so I don't think you even understood my post.

[God]

And I'm just pointing out, again, that the situations are not necessarily comparable, because outside of Bioware, the options for non-white, non-male, non-straight gamers to play a protagonist who represents them is considerably more limited.  If I take an inveterate carnivore to a vegetarian restaurant, I can hardly tell them 'well just order something else you like' if the whole menu is things they don't like (not the best analogy, but you get my point.)

 

Not to mention, upholding the status quo is every bit as sociopolitical as challenging it.  Even an argument purely about logic carries political weight, in this context, because it's taking place in a political framework (which virtually everything in life does, honestly - our actions and beliefs shape our society, because none of us is an island unto themself.)

 

Once again you're talking past my point. You're arguing something that I'm not, and it's pretty clear that you're not taking in what I'm saying.

 

My view: let the OP post what he wants to post here, and let him make an argument to defend his position. 

 

My point: A lot of people are attacking the OP for his opinion, which is understandably unpopular, and refusing to accurately comprehend his points, using it as catalyst to make further statements that are relative to SJW rhetoric. My point is pointing out the hypocrisy in the purely academic analysis of logical arguments. 

They're (and possibly you're) using the same arguments against the OP that they themselves felt was used against them. It's just a charade of righteousness that is wrapped around a core of inanity and verbal (or textual?) slap fights. 

 

Overall, my view is to show how unproductive the entire critique is. Granted, this is an internet forum, so most people here by default have some amount of unproductive time to kill, but you'd think they'd find another unproductive topic or rationale to get productive on.

 

I'm not making a sociopolitical statement here, nor does my statement need to be used as one. I've already bought a book 'Angry White Men' which details the concepts more logically than any SJW on here for that.

[God]

Calling character "lady manhands", "ugly", saying that female characters should not have scars, moles, short hair, strong jaws etc. is. 

 

So it's sexist. We men have preferences after all. I don't think that women should have to objectively hold themselves to men's standards, but I also don't feel that men should have to be beholden of women's ideas on beauty either (that right there is evolution in action).

 

Please tell me you're not going to lecture me on why I should find an obese woman beautiful.

[AWTEW]

Straight guys only got two options? Whoopdie friggen do. be grateful you got two !Aces' ( and the related spectrum ) got 0 LI , and you don't see us making a thread complaining about it every other day, or saying the characters are 'filthy ugly sexuals.

Krist, be happy you got two.

[Panda]

So it's sexist. We men have preferences after all. I don't think that women should have to objectively hold themselves to men's standards, but I also don't feel that men should have to be beholden of women's ideas on beauty either (that right there is evolution in action).

 

Please tell me you're not going to lecture me on why I should find an obese woman beautiful.

 

There is people who find obese women beatiful. You might be not one of them but that doesn't matter they don't exist.

 

It's sexist to claim that some feature that some woman have is universally bad and wrong, and demand that BW has to do always universally attractive and sexy LI's without strong jaws, moles, scars, short hair, button noses etc.

 

It's not sexist to have preferences and dislike some features.

 

Also don't bring evolution in to argument God, evolution theory is heresy against your creations after all ^^;

[Liveshiptrader]

There is people who find obese women beatiful. You might be not one of them but that doesn't matter they don't exist.

 

It's sexist to claim that some feature that some woman have is universally bad and wrong, and demand that BW has to do always universally attractive and sexy LI's without strong jaws, moles, scars, short hair, button noses etc.

 

It's not sexist to have preferences and dislike some features.

 

Also don't bring evolution in to argument God, evolution theory is heresy against your creations after all ^^;

 

Some people do but there are features of an obese woman most don't as they are seen as unhealthy

 

When it comes down to it there are some universal traits people find attractive, it's about what people find desirable in a mate even if they never plan to have children, if someone does find an obese woman attractive you will tend to find it's because they normally have large breasts and a big ass, tough luck to the obese guys.