Skip Navigation

User banner
InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D
DrivebyHaiku @ DrivebyHaiku @lemmy.ca
Posts
0
Comments
31
Joined
7 mo. ago

  • Good point

    Jump

  • Something to consider on two fronts.

    1. Parents being of both sexes is not terribly important for long term child raising. Same sex couples sometimes choose to adopt but they often have the capacity to have children themselves without assistance of a medical body and often with the help of friends or compassionate donors. There are a lot of gay folks whose names are on the birth certificates of their kids because they did the deed the old fashioned way in the interest of having a kid. They maybe just didn't enjoy the process. This doesn't present a problem legally because mechanically speaking people have kids out of wedlock or split up amicably all the time and the mechanisms for transferring parental rights are pretty much the exact same.

    Also your concerns are not new. They are also not unstudied. It has been studied extensively. Science has found there is no meaningful difference between the outcomes of being raised by a same-sex couple as a mixed sex couple. They measured their rubric across a number of success variables across physical wellbeing, mental and emotional health, acedemic outcomes and so on. Basically if you are raised by adults who show affection, are responsible and committed to the wellbeing of the child it doesn't really matter what their sex is. At some point trusting a body of science is nessisary over one's gut feelings or supposition.

    Here's a study with an approachable abstract to get you started.

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4091994/

    1. Marriage exists in a number of cultures, its functions even in a traditional sense are not always religious in nature and not all cultures that have marriage have bans on same sex couples marrying. Religions can also be newly formed and are still valid. Banning same sex marriage is in effect favouring some religion over others. Christianity does not have a monopoly on the concept of marriage as a religious feature. When a religions (ie Christian) reason is given to enforce a marriage ban it stops other religions from being able to properly function. Gay marriage being federally allowed does not stop Christian denominations from being allowed to refuse to marry couples under the beliefs of their religious creed.

  • Good point

    Jump

  • This presupposes that marriage is a strictly religious tradition - which is false. Marriage as a concept exists across many cultures sometimes as a religious tradition and sometimes as a civil one or as a swearing of personal oaths.

    It is also not strictly a thing that all religions abhor same sex unions or do not have traditional same sex marriage as a thing. There are a number of Indigenous religions across the world which have gay marriage as a feature, new religions can factor them in as valid or existing religious sects can change. Bans on gay marriage force the state to adopt the traditional Christian stance on marriage at the exclusion of other religions and cultural traditions... While also denying a number of functions at a civil level such as spousal benefits, rights regarding legal decisions, visitation rights in hospitals and so on.

  • Snoop Dogg Admits He's “Scared” to Go to Movies Because of LGTBQ+ Representation

    Jump

  • Why is the assumption by these people that there is a sexual component required in the explanation? Age appropriate explanations are easy.

    "Know how some families have one mommy and one daddy? Some families have two mommies or two daddies instead."

    If the kids ask about the actual mechanics of procreation they are old enough to hear something like:

    "Some couples adopt or they find someone to have a baby with who helps them make a family."

    Was there any need to mention surrogacy or donors? No. Kids don't need to oversexualize queer people. Adults don't need to over sexualize queer people! When people are sheltered from our existence until they are in their early teens they tend to think of gay couples as explicitly just sexual relationships rather than romantic or family building ones that are as dynamic as straight relationships because they were introduced to them as a sexual mechanics first kind of way. It's dehumanizing.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • Because I don't find you terribly sympathetic. Yes, I would like better inclusion and more variety in games and can look at past examples and point out what worked and what didn't from a queer perspective but you came in hot with your nose out of joint about how what is being asked is bad "for everyone" as though you are the arbitor of the everyman.

    It's worthless to conceed ground over and over again to people who always wanted us to disappear. It doesn't work. You want to go on the woke advisory board on Steam and see how nit picky they get? This isn't about media. This is part of an interconnected effort to get all of us to disappear from public life forever and it didn't start, it never stopped and the point is it won't until it all goes back to the way it used to be.

    What is "in it" for the non-queer gamers is realizing they aren't the center of the fucking universe. That they can show their support for something that isn't explicitly for them and leave homophobic assholes with no wonderful jungle of slightly less homophobic assholes to hide behind. But no the second it costs you anything suddenly it's the end of the fucking world. People want to feel all nice and accepting and open minded but they never want it to actually inconvenience them.

    By all means keep on harping your one fucking studio you hate. I hope it keeps you warm.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • Was it worth it? Coming down hard on queer and telling us we're terrible people for daring tp ask for something better and throwing your lot in with the oppressors at the smallest hurdle?

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • Are these "bad things in the name of inclusion" just making a game you don't like? The push against "inclusion" on a general scale has lead to real world harms because a bunch of babies can't come to terms with there being pieces of media with choices they don't like and threw a fucking tantrum. There isn't really a side anymore where railing against the harms of "inclusion" isn't propping up the arguement that minorities "earned" the actions against them by asking "too much".

    People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people "had this coming" because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games. The anti-DEI crowd is the Conservative crowd and you might be on the fringe but you aren't outside the radius.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • There's no "actual homophobes" vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and 'forced inclusion' are in a game people" - that's just different degrees of homophobia.

    Games changed a bit so that they aren't all made for you specifically. Those franchises didn't belong to you and for some people those 'ruined games' are their favorite games. Everyone has studios they don't like. Not all representation is gunna be great because not all writing is going to be great but when inclusion "ruins it for everyone" in your veiw look around and ask if the people around you who are discussing it is actually a good cross section of "everyone".

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • Ah yes, the two sexualities - political and non-political. You really aren't as far along as you think.

    I can accept that you are unhappy and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable. Gods forbid they ever be like every other form of media and actually have a message they want to convey or try anything new. I can say having something tailored specifically for you is quite nice - now that more of us actually get to experience that.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • By making the player make the first move, they empower the player to choose.

    The problem often becomes that the entire sexuallity of mechanically bi characters or all characters in the game are often under player control. In a some circumstances games with this mechanism will have the characters who are not chosen as romantic options pair with no one ever or defer to straight behaviour. This is in deference to games wanting to have it's cake and eat it too.

    Examples of this in action :

    Stardew Valley where if you don't choose a same sex option to romance - no other characters ever have any romances ever. The one exception is Leah who has an ex who shows up late in the romance pursuit who tries to win her back. However, the ex is whatever gender the PC is so if it's a hetero relationship, it still appears to be a hetero relationship.

    Harvest Moon Mineral Town (later editions) give the player to options to romance same sex options... But everyone you don't choose pairs up in hetero relationships and no other characters.

    In both games there is no other queer rep so the player essentially opts in or out to all queer representation in the game. Blanket Heterosexuallity or bi-invisibility until given player approval is the default.

    Indy games are generally the leaders for actual queer rep that isn't optional to the game's plot where characters sexuallities are not revealed by the player opt in.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • Hey, just a heads up assuming "gender politics" don't matter and being upset if a character is noticeably queer - makes you a part of the homophobic conservative circles. People, irl are queer, omitting queer people from settings where they would just exist as part of the world because "they shouldn't be there" is a little queerphobic.

    Conservative circles have been screaming about woke games forever just when options to have non-binary people exist at character creation or when there is one gay side character. A lot of folks in the arts, including in game development, are queer and like to make stories that didn't exist when they were growing up. Your opinion is your own but assuming it's universally considered "good game design" to force developers to exclude the things they are passionate to put in their games to appease a howling mob that is never happy even when they get what they say they want is a bit rich.

  • Whine harder you assholes

    Jump

  • What you are describing is a concept of the mechanically bisexual. The options as given often allow players to choose in a sandbox game whether they experience the game as a completely non-queer experience or not. It sometimes creates queerness as an option rather than a core part of an experience which rep wise is considered a step better than when all romance options in games were mandatorily heterosexual but also kind of a cop out where player choice means all characters are often Shrodinger's bi. If you want to experience say Skyrim as an almost entirely queer free experience - you can. Your choices flip that representation on and off like a lightswitch so if you have queerphobic tendencies the game doth not offend much. No one ever hits on you first.

    Rep wise Gay characters are ones specifically ones where the queerness isn't optional, it's a part of the canon of the character. Straight characters often are so in fixed story narratives where they have hetero relationships and if they have brushes that look like same sex romance it's played for laughs and treated as not really an option. Since culture still sort of assumes straightness as a default if the character only ever is coded romantically by the frame of the game to be attracted to the opposite sex they can be termed a "straight character" because as a player the game's interfacing with that character's sexuality is mandatory. An example is the Prince of Persia games or the Final Fantasy series which have a romantically coded opposite sex paramours that you don't have an option not to interface with the character's sexuallity.

    This is way more common in older games and fixed story franchises.

  • Why are you so liberal?

    Jump

  • Political philosophy is fascinating, please keep it in the excellent universities (sorry, “colleges”) outside of the USA and let us try and fix this goddamned mess.

    How else do you think you are going to fix this mess? Revolution is great for creating change but dollars to donuts you end up with shit systems unless you have a core of political science minded people in the pocket. That really was what made the original American revolution work - you had a core of people who were HEAVILY invested in the works of political science philosophers ( Locke, Hume etc.) and the dedication to replace the outgoing regime with something other than meatheaded revolutionaries who just replicate the same system over again with some new face.

  • Why are you so liberal?

    Jump

  • Colloquially liberal as opposed to the more strict political philosophical definition.

    If you are going with the latter none of the above statements are strictly liberal as liberalism is defined by a very personal property based capitalism forward structure and a focus on personal freedoms balanced by a set of assumed privileges.

    By the political philosophy definition both Republicans and Democrats are liberal. A growing number of people find the issue of the USA's strict adhereance to old school philosophic liberalism the main problem of both parties since it does fuck all to check the accrual of personal property or provide safety nets. If you wanted to be more accurate by the change in social standard in the place you find yourself the above values in the post are safest "Progressive". At least keeping this definition in mind helps navigate a lot of the conversation of politics in many Lemmy instances.

  • My job is to keep Zohran Mamdani pro Israel - Bernie Sanders

    Jump

  • Not saying Israel is complex. Dealing with the victims of the propaganda is complex.

    Compassion isn't just good praxis, people who fall back on feeling victimized double down on whatever their base investment is. If you want people to accept facts and actually change their minds you have to engage the person's feelings first.

  • My job is to keep Zohran Mamdani pro Israel - Bernie Sanders

    Jump

  • It's a complex issue Bernie is alluding to. There are a lot of Jewish people who think of Israel of sort of "Their place" in the world where they are centered and the controlling stake of culture. People who are raised to think this way feel critism towards the place as an attack on their Jewishness. Those feelings can override and get in the way of treating Isreal as a country, with a political agenda and make it feel as though it were a criticism of Jewish people.

    You know that whole "facts don't care about your feelings" thing the right gets on about? It's actually backwards. Feelings do not care about facts and if you don't adequately explain your purpose you can make people feel victimized even when they aren't. Jewish people who feel victimized by critism of Israel are responding to a mix of cultural programming because the idea of Israel is their security blanket. Problem is the security blanket isn't actually securing them from anything, it was just a tool to soothe anxieties about having a place to retreat to free of persecution... and now that the security blanket has been proven to be woven out of asbestos and warcrimes the trauma of prying peoples attachment from it is causing damage amongst a historically persecuted group. This is Bernie's reminder - to be sensitive to the process of individual trauma while detangling them from the genocidal regime it's emotionally fuzed to.

  • Anyone who doesn't support the Trans Agenda(tm) is a fucking psychopath

    Jump

  • "Being born in the wrong body" is a phrase used to simplify a fairly complex situation in a way that also makes it seem like to trans people it's a metaphysical belief about the nature of the the soul. This is by and large incorrect. What trans people experience isn't delusion. Delusion relies on a belief that contradicts reality or relies on the very shaky ground of the insubstantiated supernatural. What trans people experience is an uncontrolled mental reaction to physical replicatable stimuli to their own bodies. All the cultural stuff is in service to this.

    For example - When you call a trans man a woman - what that person is reacting to is your perception of their body making them ground in that physical discomfort. It is like if you had a physical feature you despised, say a physical deformation with a traumatic memory attached, and people kept remarking on it in conversation. While you might be able to walk the world happily temporarily forgetting it exists someone remarking on it is like shoving a mirror in your face. This is why misgendering doesn't have to be intentional to be hurtful.

    Our culture has a lot of cultural protections built in for people who have deformaties through birth or accident because we understand universally the effect those things have on the psyche. It's impolite to stare, to mention or exclude people with those features. Gender however is harmless for about 98% of the population. It's remarked upon in the form of pronouns in every conversation where three or more people participate. This is ultimately why that saying "trans women are woman (etc.) " exists. It's not them saying that trans people have any misunderstandings or delusions about the history of their bodies or how they differ from cis women. They have no delusions, they are painfully aware, at all times, exactly how they differ. What that saying is trying to convey is that a trans person should not be treated or categorized by society any differently than cis people of that gender or should be accommodated for being treated as neither gender.

    This is also why surgeries are often employed. It's in part to gain unwitting compliance from a population who reacts to physical sex characteristics and pairs that with gender. It's mending how people react to themselves in the mirror as much as it is removing the mirror from the hands of other people. What the removal of the disorder portion of the DSM was about was an acknowledgement that this problem is cultural. It is as much a problem with society's constructions and beliefs around sex and gender as it is a singular person's problem. Just as being gay is only a problem if society responds to it as an undesirable characteristic the issues with being trans are exacerbated by cultural sorting of gender into exclusive categories and people's personal ick about people's surgical and hormonal personal autonomy around their bodies.

    The reason trans people have to frame their fight primarily as medically nessisary intervention is largely because of cis people's squeamishness causing them issues of lack of personal freedom to choose how to personally navigate a society not built to manage their specific personal struggles around their physical sex. The problem with society isn't going anywhere most places yet so the individual is assuming the burdens of that and it's well proven that those experiencing this issue are tackling that issue in thoughtful, logic based ways with proven ability to accurately judge risk and reward of their choices on that front.

  • Locked

    ‘Please walk away from Harry Potter’: why the stars of HBO’s new TV show are in for decades of social media hell

    Jump

  • Really not looking forward to a repeat of the time of the Hogwarts Legacy game. Online Trans spaces were being brigaded with every reveiw or JKR tweet and comment sections filled unchallenged with tacit endorsements after the trans voices fell silent because we were all just hoping the abuse would stop. That the HP targeted adds and their companion transphobic political adds riding on the wake of the high on queer creators would dry up. The media, the platforms the people coming into places proclaiming they are gunna buy multiple copies of the game to show us what is what. The suicidal ideation of our most vulnerable friends as they deal with feelings of being targeted and feelings of being unwanted or ignored by the world...

    Most people not caring might not be "valid" but it will feel like the truth again.

  • DOGE employees are facing a really painful karma

    Jump

  • Oh for... It's been like a few months, just leave DOGE off your resumes and come up with something to explain the gap! If you were notorious enough to be recognized by name as a DOGE staffer then just go job hunting in the red states or set up somewhere where nobody cares. There's plenty of tech bro nonsense firms that will take them...The softest brush with anything resembling consequences has this lot screaming and while I understand folk love hearing it their entitled assholery is grating as hell.

  • Is Trump’s base racist? Social scientists begin to weigh in

    Jump

  • Women who are like that usually change their mind after a couple of years buckled into the yoke. There's currently a whole group of women stuck in golden handcuffs in the trad wife influencer community who are miserable in their relationships but making too much ad money to consider stopping.

  • Astroterfing

    Jump

  • I mean dude, love the energy but this isn't a protest to those laws... that's just going out for enough time in public to need to use a public restroom as a trans man.

    Trans men getting arrested by police for 'causing a disturbance' by being forced to use the women's bathroom isn't a bug, it's a transphobic feature. They want to make being trans as uncomfortable as possible because they think that if they can ratchet up the discomfort level less people will attempt to transition. Trans men who pass on average are massively uncomfortable using the ladies room because it's a great way to get arrested by cops, hastled by security, banned from private property, assaulted by women, yelled at and abused because everyone assumes you are a cis male creep, they want you to suffer for being trans or they just don't care.

    Like trans women are generally the forefront of the conversation but when it comes to trans men this isn't "malicious compliance." it's either compliance compliance or stealthily breaking the law and hoping nobody notices. The trans deterrent system is operating as intended.