A response to those against adding LGBTQIA+
Comments
-
Omg you dont need representation to exist
Im part of LGBT too, im proud of who i am and i dont need something to show that im existing
I am a full human being, not only THIS. Being gay bi or anything else is not my full personnality
4 -
No one said otherwise.
but we don’t need explicit exclusion while heterosexual relationships get featured more and more.
3 -
Personally I don’t understand all the posts about a character specifically in the LGTB+ community. From my point of view and I think others too they don’t understand why it has to be their whole personality ( or it’s coming across as people want it as a characters whole personality) I’m pretty sure character like Jake park and others are suggested to be in that community anyway. It’s kind of like your asking the lore of a new character to be solely around that they are gay or anything when a lot of the backstorys don’t even include romantic relationships. I think If people want something specific cosmetics of different pride flags would be pretty cool for all characters.
2 -
Literally no one wants a character whose only trait is being LGBT+.
those people want this topic equally treated like heterosexual relationships have been treated since introduction of Nurse.
4 -
you don't need a reason for a character to be lgbt. get that out of your head.
you are not here asking people to have a reason to be straight are you? then stfu.
2 -
The thing is, making such a fuss over it just alienates them more. who care's
They don't affect anyone but themselve's
If people are just making a fuss it's just TO MAKE A FUSS
People just just be OK with everything that doesn't affect them and if it does then they can go ham, scream and shout then
1 -
I meant as its coming across, with the multiple posts and everything. i don't really care if there is or anything it wont change my gaming experience. But im trying to get the understand of the people who are getting bored of seeing multiple posts of the same thing.
0 -
Here we go again...
4 -
If you're heterosexual, you're homophobic or in the closet. That's pretty much all I can see in this thread.
Most of the posts I'm reading are asking for a good character, a good back story, and fitting it into the lore. People don't care about the gender of the characters, just make them good ones. Not some trash thrown into the game to appease a minority of people who cry the loudest.
ffs. There are any number of examples of this, but all anyone wants to focus on is some stupid label.
Give us GOOD characters with FUN powers and NEW mechanics! If they happen to be trans, gay, bi, tri, or parallel I don't care. If they're fun, I'm going to play them regardless. If i like their design, or maybe their animations, I'm going to play them. If you give me some trash character for the sake of "representation" I'm not touching it.
Black, white, pink, bi, gay, christian, muslim, liberal, conservative... we're all human. If you have to have a label on someone to "connect" to them, maybe you're the one who needs a little help. I'll just keep on playing the characters I love, and nothing says love like running around the map as a little Asian girl being chased by a big burly man.
Post edited by Rizzo on3 -
I'm gay and I get weary of the complaining from the "LGBT" community at every single game/franchise. I'm someone who plays this game because it's horror. I've scarcely ever read the survivors back stories, but for shiggles I just read Grandpa's (Bill Overbeck- I usually play him). Not one mention of his sexual orientation. He could have moonlighted as a drag queen in Vietnam in his youth and we'd never know, because it's just not very relevant to being trapped in a netherworld being chased by a murderous killer. So what does "LGBT representation" even look like in this game?
I think the constant pressuring of companies to be "inclusive" isn't doing us any favours. It can get rather grating imo, and usually a small handful of incredibly loud kids on social media are the only ones demanding it.
The last thing I want is to have is a character that's draped in glittery rainbow flags with a Lady GaGa soundtrack running in the background lol. It's a survival horror game. Your sexual orientation or gender identity is irrelevant as you're dangling off a meat hook. Just my 2 cents.
6 -
And thats the problem that most of the LBGTQ+ have. If its irrelevant, then why does it bother to others so bad that there is a member of that community in the game. I personally feel, that yes it may not matter but if it makes the LGBTQ+ community happy then why not?
2 -
most people are not complaining that much though, there are just asking to be treated equally to heterosexuals.
there are multiple heterosexual relationships mentioned in the backstories of character, none of them have anything to do with them being in this game. But it’s lore and it’s okay that way. We don’t need explicit exclusion of anything LGBT+ if heterosexuality is already here.
2 -
'LGBT' people aren't a Hive Mind who all think the same way. We're different people with different thoughts.
Of course, if a survivor happens to be gay/lesbian w/e I'm cool with that. I just don't think it's so pressing all the time.
Like I'm reading other character's bio's now, and I'm through 3 of them and no mention of anyone's sexual orientation yet. How do we know they're all straight?
5 -
Nurse, Felix, Frank and Julie, David. All have confirmed heterosexual relationships.
with Wraith and Ace it’s heavily implied in cosmetic descriptions.
all of this could also mean they are bi. We don’t know.
a very small minority is pressing though, and there is also a minority is is pressing against it.
in the end, explicit exclusion is not needed and the devs have already said that they want to be inclusive.
1 -
Quite sad that people have to pick a character based on a specific skin colour, gender or sexual preference in the first place. I play Jake as he's the coolest aesthetically imo. I'm a straight white male from England so could have gone for David. I couldn't care less what Jake's sexuality is, he's just a skin.
6 -
Like I mentioned earlier, sexual orientation does not matter especially in a game like DBD, BUT it isn’t harming anything in-game if a character does represent a huge portion of people in the world so why not? I do agree, I don’t really like the pressing for it though, it can be a bit overwhelming and can make companies force disingenuous changes into the game. That in itself is harmful.
I think not knowing everyone’s sexual orientation is what makes the game more fun and imaginative in my opinion.
1 -
So what you and others want so vehemently is a snippet of lore on a survivor that states explicitly that they're not straight b/c there are 3 characters that have mentioned hetero relationships?
If I were Behaviour I wouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole, and I'll tell you why; the small, vocal minority on social media that demand these things usually cannot be pleased. I've seen it happen dozens of times. A company gets pressured into being "inclusive", and they think "hmm, ok, we can do that". But it is never good enough. The mob will complain that it wasn't done right. That someone looks like a "bad stereotype", or "not gay enough". I'm calling it now- game journalists will analyze every pixel of that character, break it apart and find something offensive.
And God help them if they make a Killer 'LGBT'. I'm warning you Behaviour, don't even try it LMAO.
Honestly, I have no issues ( of course) if a new survivor just happens to be gay. It's just such a loaded issue these days with things being how they are.
3 -
What people want is for LGBT lore to be treated just like heterosexual lore, instead of being purposefully excluded, which feels forced. Is that so bad?
BHVR has already decided to do it without being pressured, so your "I've seen it happen dozens of times" thing is moot.
0 -
I do agree, I don’t really like the pressing for it though, it can be a bit overwhelming and can make companies force disingenuous changes into the game. That in itself is harmful.
Nobody pressured or is pressuring BHVR.
2 -
why does sexual preference need to even be a thing anyway? ive never picked a survivor over somebody else because i assumed they were straight or whatever, it dosent even come into my mind, i just pick a survivor i feel like playing, pick my perks and think of interesting ways of playing, thats literally it.
3 -
I've been quite clear as a gay person myself that of course it isn't "bad". But you're already assuming it has been purposely, consciously excluded. On what basis do you know that? Once again, most survivors have no reference to their sexual orientation in their lore.
If Behaviour wants to give it a shot, go for it. But I'm calling it right here, right now, there will be complaining. There will be articles written by woke journalists dissecting how the new character is "problematic" lol.
3 -
The devs have decided to be inclusive on their own free will, as they have already stated.
those complaining about it done wrong are mostly those that had a problem with it anyway. Don’t make everyone that’s just asking for equal treatment the bad guys here
1 -
But you're already assuming it has been purposely, consciously excluded. On what basis do you know that?
The devs' own words.
Once again, most survivors have no reference to their sexual orientation in their lore.
And yet the ones who do are all heterosexual, even though the devs had originally said they were going to avoid sexual orientations. Curious, no?
If Behaviour wants to give it a shot, go for it. But I'm calling it right here, right now, there will be complaining.
Yes, I'm sure there will be complaints, just like there were complaints about a product changing its name and virtually everything else in the entirety of human history. There will also be bad faith actors trying to stir ######### up, which always happens with matters like this. Remember that guy who was caught on Twitter pretending to be a gay black man? Anyway, are complaints from people like that a good reason for the devs to curb their own artistic freedom?
2 -
The devs have said that they didn’t include LGBT because they want to confirm anything sexually about their chars. While they were claiming that they have added many heterosexual relationships. That was exclusion. The devs have seen their mistake and apologized.
2 -
My disagreeing with you does not mean I'm attacking you and "making you the bad guy".
But I'll just leave it at this. I've said my piece.
2 -
Never accused you of making me personally the bad guy.
but you were claiming that those asking for inclusion are the ones later claiming the inclusion is done wrong and overanalyze that. That behavior is wrong of course. But you don’t know if that will even happen here. And excluding LGBT just because there are people like this is not the right way.
2 -
I think it has more to do that it is "forced". Nowadays it's more of a hype to be part of a diversity it seems (not that I have anything against other people), but it's more of a "jump on the hypetrain" move I think. At least, I can imagine people feel that way.
Not that I can care less about a character, since I don't read the lore of characters in this game anyway. If they have good perks, that's all I care about in this game. I main one character and that's it. After level 40 I only play that character for a daily and nothing more.
0 -
People are always claiming it is forced. But there is no reason to believe it in this case. The devs have stated their opinion and they have shown before that they don’t do stuff just because the community demands it (see UI change, they are not reverting it back even though everyone demanding it
2 -
I'm not saying I think it's forced. I can imagine people feel that way, especially because it's a thing right now in the world.
Like I said, I don't care about a characters background or when someone is transsexual. In the end, all I care about is if the other person is happy about themselves.
1 -
People who say it's "forced" can't even explain why without tripping all over themselves. One guy said it felt forced because there are no LGBT horror icons, and also that you can't make LGBT horror icons because it'd feel forced because there are no LGBT horror icons. See the problem there?
There is no argument for the exclusion of LGBT lore that doesn't apply to non-LGBT lore that is already in the game. That "forced" complaint is moot, as far as I'm concerned. If someone decides to focus on the fact that a character is LGBT, to the exclusion of every other trait, that's on them. It doesn't mean the character is defined by their sexual orientation and it doesn't mean the character was "forced".
This "forced" crap is the same argument that was used against Claudette, back when the game was released. She was apparently a "forced token character" because she was an intelligent black woman, whereas Meg was the athletic one. They said that their traits had "obviously" been switched "because SJWs".
2 -
Just for the record, I didn’t want to accuse you of that. I just wanted to point out that this argument isn’t holding in this case.
And people who use this argument are not really involved or informed enough with Behaviours statements (which is okay and I just try to give them the appropriate information).
Or they use this argument as an excuse to be anti-LGBT (which is just not okay)
2 -
I mean I don’t have a problem with this at all. But I think it would be more beneficial to make cosmetics represeting lgbt rather than make a whole new chapter
0 -
Why?
0 -
Um, I never said I wanted a reason for them to be lgbt. All I said was that I'd prefer a character with an interesting story/design, who also happens to be lgbt, instead of a character who's lgbt and that's it.
0 -
I don’t have any issues with adding a character who just so happens to be LGBT, however if they’re a token character who’s entire identity is LGBT sexuality, then while it obviously won’t make me stop playing the game, I’ll find it highly cringe-worthy and tedious.
LGBT sexuality is shoehorned into just about everything these days and I can see why some people are getting bored with it. We get it. Some people are LGBT. I’m bi. One of my friends is a transvestite. There’s no need to keep shouting it from the rooftops - the entire establishment has your back already, as does the majority of society. There’s nothing you can do about the fact that some people don’t like it.
In summary, by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT, but don’t make it a blatant pandering to tired old identity politics as this actually has a negative effect on the LGBT community because it makes what would normally be an understanding and accepting person into someone who just don’t want to hear it anymore.
4 -
There is no reason to believe that BHVR would create a character who’s entire identity is LGBT based on all already released characters.
and if people are tired of hearing about it, especially in this case they can easily choose to entirely ignore it. It will only be mentioned in lore and nothing more. No one forces anyone to read or be invested in the lore.
1 -
What I AM against is a character who's lgbt just for the sake of being lgbt, and that's it.
I repeat, a character doesn't need a reason to be lgbt+.
their story doesn't need to tie in to it, it doesn't even need to be mentioned in the backstory besides being acknowledged.
stop thinking that a character can't be lgbt+ without a reason for it. that's dumb
5 -
LGBT sexuality is shoehorned into just about everything these days and I can see why some people are getting bored with it.
Really? Because I can't, at least on an intellectual level.
On an emotional level, sure, having something you're not used to appear multiple times can be annoying.
On an intellectual level, the fact remains that the vast majority of media is about heterosexual cis white people (disproportionately so).
And "shoehorned"? Why is the inclusion of anything other than the default seen as "shoehorned"? Artistic freedom, and all that.
There’s no need to keep shouting it from the rooftops - the entire establishment has your back already, as does the majority of society.
Yes, "the establishment" (whatever that means) and the "majority of society" that keeps gay torture camps (commonly called "conversion therapy" to hide the fact that it's quite literally torture) up and running.
In summary, by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT, but don’t make it a blatant pandering to tired old identity politics as this actually has a negative effect on the LGBT community because it makes what would normally be an understanding and accepting person into someone who just don’t want to hear it anymore.
You can be understanding and accepting while also not wanting to hear about something. However, if all it takes for you to go from "understanding and accepting" to "hateful and opposing" is the presence of the thing you (supposedly) understand and accept, then you were never very understanding and accepting to begin with.
An example: I understand and accept that people like to eat popcorn in movie theaters. Personally, I can't even stand the smell, makes me nauseous. The fact that I see popcorn associated with movies doesn't make me hate movies, nor theaters, nor popcorn eaters.
2 -
"Gay torture camps" are a little off topic. Plus they're not the only kinda torture camps but that's besides the point.
Stop making this a "straight white men run everything" rant because that's exactly the type of attitude which I'm trying to discourage. In many places straight white men have been run out in place of minorities. Poor white working class males are the least likely to pass at university and they are too often taken advantage of because they somehow have to pay reparations for their ancestors slavery crimes and whatever. Many white working class families used to be slaves and it was common for them to work in workhouses back in the day. You don't have the full picture so I'd appreciate it if you didn't put "cis white men" in a bubble and talk smack about them.
I don't like the framing you have of "straight white people are entitled so let's give everyone else something to make up for it". I think that is an outdated way of seeing things.
3 -
I KNOW that the story doesn't have to tie in to them being lgbt. "I'd prefer a character with an interesting story/design, who also happens to be lgbt."
In my first comment I wasn't saying the story had to tie in to them being lgbt. I was saying I'm against someone who is lgbt, and that's all there is to the character. With nothing else to them other than the fact that they're lgbt.
0 -
Stop making this a "straight white men run everything" rant because that's exactly the type of attitude which I'm trying to discourage.
Your words, not mine. I didn't rant, insult, or denigrate cis white men. I pointed out that the vast majority of media features heterosexual cis white people (didn't even use the word "men"), which is just a statistical fact.
Why are you always trying to put words in my mouth?
2 -
Completely different story here in the UK. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm not a fan of labels at all maybe I vented a little.
0 -
I recommend you re-read Orion’s post in a calm manner. You are accusing him of saying things there that he most definitely did not say at all.
1 -
I was referring to his attitude suggesting that straight white people run everything and everyone else deserves immediate better treatment to make up for it therefore a LGBT addition would be good.
I find it quite ignorant and condescending and I hope I've misread how he's acting.
1 -
Completely different story here in the UK.
That's not what I heard from my friend in the UK, just FYI.
To be clear, I was referring to the number of characters in each movie, ad, whatever, not the total number of movies, ads, whatever, that feature characters with certain attributes.
I'm not a fan of labels at all
Labels can be useful, it all depends on usage and context. For example, I'm a bisexual cis male. In a dating context, these are useful labels because some people might not be into (or might be exclusively into) trans men, or might be prejudiced against (or in favor of) bisexuals. In an online forum, they're only useful as an example. An example of a bad label would be basically anything political, because it highly depends on the country and is extremely reductive even within the same country.
1 -
I didn't suggest anything, that's all you. I pointed out that the majority of media is disproportionately heterosexual cis white people, and thus, on an intellectual level, I don't understand why people make such a big deal out of characters who happen to be outside that group.
1 -
You see. The TDLR of my post is “by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT but don’t make it a hollow token character,” yet you still take issue with it. You’ve even managed to try and make it about race. This is the problem with intersectional ideologues. They want to police everyone’s speech and behaviour, and if anything is off by their imaginary standard it’s offensive and something to make a big fuss about.
I can, on an intellectual level. I judge people by their character and actions, not their sexual preference or the colour of their skin. The same goes for media - I judge it by the content and value provided, not by whether the lead character is gay, or black, etc etc. It’s perfectly reasonable to find forced identity politics tedious and boring, and no amount of policing will change that.
Yes. Shoehorned. It’s very obvious when I mention shoehorning that I’m referring to shoehorning, and not to characters or personalities who just so happen to be LGBT, hence the point of my post in the first place.
There are many such cases of token characters and personalities being shoehorned into various media to appease particular groups of people and to profit from them in the process. This is obviously what I’m referring to and I suspect you’re aware of that.
The establishment and the majority of society is indeed fully behind the LGBT community and this is highly demonstrable. I could give many examples, but frankly this is going way off topic and I’ve really no desire for a big debate, so we’ll agree to disagree. I will say though, the fact that the extremely niche “gay conversion therapy” exists doesn’t magically mean that there’s systemic discrimination against the LGBT community, or that the establishment/society is against the LGBT community.
Anyway, what exactly does gay conversion therapy have to do with an LGBT character in DBD?
You’re missing the point. Someone can be understanding and accepting whilst also finding something boring and tedious - this is true - however, extremist identity politics is absolutely going to alienate and irk some of those people, turning them away from the “cause.” No amount of policing, criticising, banning, doxxing or bullying will ever change this. Some people will simply become fed up, turn around and say “I don’t want to hear it.”
Lets try and keep this on topic. The only people who can police my speech or opinions on these boards are the mods. The sad thing is my comment was supportive of an LGBT character, but you still had to take issue with it instead of simply accepting that we share different views on the overarching topic.
5 -
I'm not policing anyone, nor did I "try to make it about race", so you can drop it.
I disagree with you on certain things you said and expressed my disagreement, that's the point of a discussion forum. I find it quite funny that you claim I take issue with different opinions when you clearly can't handle my disagreement.
As for the race thing, I mentioned it to point out that, intellectually, I don't see why people are against LGBT representation in media on the basis that "there's too much of it" when another group already dominates media representation. It's plainly written, I don't see why you're putting words in my mouth.
1 -
The discussion is about an LGBT character in DBD, not how many white straight people are on TV. Personally, I don’t judge people by the colour of their skin nor their sexuality, and I apply the same curtesy to media. I find the whole “representation” thing very faulty and highly ironic.
My whole post was saying that I’m perfectly content with an LGBT character so long as they’re not forced for the sake of politics, but you took issue with the way I said it. That’s why I was making a point about policing people’s speech and behaviour. People who look at everything through the lens of perceived identity instead of reality are obsessed with trying to force everyone to behave a certain way, and this all ties into why some of the DBD community have expressed concerns about an LGBT character in the first place. Politics, politics, politics.
You’re perfectly entitled to disagree and naturally I can handle your opinion hence why I responded to it in the way I did, humouring your arguments despite the fact that I wasn’t in the mood to debate politics. You were sidetracking the discussion unnecessarily though, instead of simply accepting that someone is in favour of an LGBT character so long as it’s not forced, you wanted to debate my reasoning.
I do get what you’re saying. But I also disagree. I don’t think there should be an LGBT character just because there are so many straight characters already. I don’t look at things that way and I think it’s a strange perspective to take. I do understand it on a certain level, but it gets taken too far and that’s what some people are annoyed with. I’m not one for keeping score, tallying up the statistics of how many this, how many that. Everything should just be taken for what it is imho
I think there should be an LGBT character because that character just so happens to be LGBT, and it’s merely a small part of their makeup as opposed to their entire identity. That’s the correct way to do representation. Make it organic. Make it fit.
Add an interesting character. Make them gay for all I care. Just make them genuine. I don’t want to see an overtly flamboyant drag queen whose tank top says “Sissies love Kpop” because it will obviously be more tired old political pandering and I’m simply not interested in that.
1 -
Serious question: do you have trouble with metaphors, comparisons, examples, parallels, and other stuff like that?
0
