The Naughty Dog Agenda

[Spiritech]

Someone earlier in the thread said Era was better now.



Same animal. They may have backed off a bit and become slightly more tolerant of free speech, but it's the same underlying progressive/SJW sensitivities.

Or maybe I misunderstood and by "new GAF" you were actually referring to GAF now, and not to Resetera as I assumed.

I do want to make clear that progressive != SJW. Progressives want equality of opportunity not equality of outcome, in this case option to choose as male or female and that is equality of opportunity and if the player base chooses 75% male and 25% female that should be fine for a progressive because you don't want to police the outcome. Everyone had the same opportunity and that is what they chose. SJW's bastardize this and try to police the outcome, in this case wanting to go so far as removing the male option.

 

[Andy]

Yeah I was comparing GAF to GAF

Oh ok, my mistake.

How does the new GAF compare to the old, in terms of what we're talking about? I haven't visited there since it collapsed.

 

[Andy]

I do want to make clear that progressive != SJW. Progressives want equality of opportunity not equality of outcome, in this case option to choose as male or female and that is equality of opportunity and if the player base chooses 75% male and 25% female that should be fine for a progressive because you don't want to police the outcome. Everyone had the same opportunity and that is what they chose. SJW's bastardize this and try to police the outcome, in this case wanting to go so far as removing the male option.

I don't want to drag this into a political discussion, but "progressive" is a label that, in my mind and the mind of many others, has become synonymous with identity politics and SJWs. There may have been a more benign meaning or intention originally, but it has gone off the rails and been badly corrupted. It may be similar to how "feminism" originally was intended to be about equality between the sexes (fine with me) but has since morphed into female superiority, entitlement, and privilege (which of course is what I ran up against at Resetera: how dare I say anything that is at all critical of that agenda).

 

[yankeessuck]

Oh ok, my mistake.

How does the new GAF compare to the old, in terms of what we're talking about? I haven't visited there since it collapsed.

From what little I have seen still very political but much more to the right. Not sure how strictly its moderated but slightly less of an echo chamber probably because there so many fewer posters.

That is what I was trying to say in regards to the video in this thread. On Resetera this guy would have been called a homophobe and the thread would be closed. GAF would probably say Naughty Dog are a bunch of SJWs. Both kinda miss the point.

 

[Andy]

From what little I have seen still very political but much more to the right. Not sure how strictly its moderated but slightly less of an echo chamber probably because there so many fewer posters.

That is what I was trying to say in regards to the video in this thread. On Resetera this guy would have been called a homophobe and the thread would be closed. GAF would probably say Naughty Dog are a bunch of SJWs. Both kinda miss the point.

Gotcha. That would be a 180 flip for GAF, or maybe 90. I'll have to check it out sometime. All the SJW types would've naturally left for Era because of the #metoo outrage that triggered GAF's collapse (many other factors involved, too). Leaving behind the people who didn't care about that or saw it as a hysterical over-reaction (which I do, too, actually ... but that was the atmosphere GAF cultivated ... live by the sword, die by the sword).

 

[Spiritech]

I don't want to drag this into a political discussion, but "progressive" is a label that, in my mind and the mind of many others, has become synonymous with identity politics and SJWs. There may have been a more benign meaning or intention originally, but it has gone off the rails and been badly corrupted. It may be similar to how "feminism" originally was intended to be about equality between the sexes (fine with me) but has since morphed into female superiority, entitlement, and privilege (which of course is what I ran up against at Resetera: how dare I say anything that is at all critical of that agenda).

Yea. I wouldn't say progressives have gone off the rails, but yea anything left or right of "center" gets thrown in with the extremes of the respective left or right by the media conflating the differences and making discussion difficult.

 

[JinCA]

Btw, anyone who thinks Resetera doesn't have the same SJW sensitivities as before, check out my most recent post in the AC: Odyssey thread. I just got banned for being a misogynist, lol.

Oh well, at least the person who banned you can feel superior now and go tell some girl what he did and see if that can get him laid.

 

[JinCA]

Sure is. Speech police. Can't say anything that might possibly be perceived as disrespectful to some subgroup based on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or whatever, no matter if it's a reasonable, fact-based opinion or not. They just want to shut you down, if your opinion is not the approved one. They usually do it by shame tactics or name-calling (racist, sexist, etc.). Or else just shouting and screaming.

I tweeted Shinobi about your ban, don't think it'll do anything but he usually seems pretty level headed so maybe he'll step in. I read your comment and what you said was totally reasonable.

 

[yankeessuck]

I tweeted Shinobi about your ban, don't think it'll do anything but he usually seems pretty level headed so maybe he'll step in. I read your comment and what you said was totally reasonable.

Biggest problem is he is given no opportunity to explain or defend his stance. No discussion allowed. The worst is assumed and he is kicked right in the ass.

 

[Kvally]

Gotcha. That would be a 180 flip for GAF, or maybe 90. I'll have to check it out sometime. All the SJW types would've naturally left for Era because of the #metoo outrage that triggered GAF's collapse (many other factors involved, too). Leaving behind the people who didn't care about that or saw it as a hysterical over-reaction (which I do, too, actually ... but that was the atmosphere GAF cultivated ... live by the sword, die by the sword).

Saw your post. 100% acceptable. If we had that ban policy here we would all be banned and stare at a read only VGF with no posts.

 

[Andy]

I tweeted Shinobi about your ban, don't think it'll do anything but he usually seems pretty level headed so maybe he'll step in. I read your comment and what you said was totally reasonable.

Thanks, JinCA, that's good of you. I don't expect any results, though. It's a culture over there, and one person isn't going to be able to change that. They've probably got some charter that Shinobi signed on to, involving what they think of as progressive beliefs but I'd call SJW/PC ideology. I stepped outside the lines of approved opinion, so I need to be disciplined and re-educated so that I think and speak correctly.

Biggest problem is he is given no opportunity to explain or defend his stance. No discussion allowed. The worst is assumed and he is kicked right in the ass.

Yeah, it's a very reactive sort of thing, this SJW stuff. They see you through the lens of some -ism, and that's all they can see. Maybe I should've put a trigger warning in my post.

It's actually pretty predictable. I knew when I said it that I would ruffle some feathers. I rolled my eyes when I got the ban. It doesn't bother me, but it does make me wonder how much I want to post or read there in the future. Our culture is sliding way too far in that direction already, and I don't want to support more of it.

Saw your post. 100% acceptable. If we had that ban policy here we would all be banned and stare at a read only VGF with no posts.

Yeah, I believe in free speech, and I like the way we have it here. People might get banned for stuff like trolling or repeatedly making personal attacks on other members, but they won't get banned for saying something that might potentially offend a subgroup.

Btw, I saw this last night, and I thought it was great. I don't agree with some of his political or religious views, but this was funny.

 

[JinCA]

Thanks, JinCA, that's good of you. I don't expect any results, though. It's a culture over there, and one person isn't going to be able to change that. They've probably got some charter that Shinobi signed on to, involving what they think of as progressive beliefs but I'd call SJW/PC ideology. I stepped outside the lines of approved opinion, so I need to be disciplined and re-educated so that I think and speak correctly.



Yeah, it's a very reactive sort of thing, this SJW stuff. They see you through the lens of some -ism, and that's all they can see. Maybe I should've put a trigger warning in my post.

It's actually pretty predictable. I knew when I said it that I would ruffle some feathers. I rolled my eyes when I got the ban. It doesn't bother me, but it does make me wonder how much I want to post or read there in the future. Our culture is sliding way too far in that direction already, and I don't want to support more of it.



Yeah, I believe in free speech, and I like the way we have it here. People might get banned for stuff like trolling or repeatedly making personal attacks on other members, but they won't get banned for saying something that might potentially offend a subgroup.

Btw, I saw this last night, and I thought it was great.

They shouldn't allow threads like that if they are going to ban people who have differing views, discussion is fine and should be allowed. It's one thing to disagree with someone in a thread but to ban them for having a different opinion is just idiotic. Val and I disagreed big time in this thread but I never once thought he shouldn't be allowed to post here because of his thought process.

I also don't get the whole "playing as a woman makes the game better" mentality. They can throw that "50% of gamers are women" fake stat around all they want, the vast majority of people who play these games are men and most men would rather play as another man, that's not shaming anyone it's just the truth. As it is they give you the option to play as a woman in this game, you would think that would be enough but now they want it in all of the marketing etc.

I know some may say "well most gamers are men so why are we playing as a lesbian in TLOU2" but this is a different situation because we are continuing a story with a character, AC (other than Ezio) changes characters with every game, TLOU2 is us getting to go deeper with an established character who was a huge part of the first game and has now grown up,.

 

[Andy]

They shouldn't allow threads like that if they are going to ban people who have differing views, discussion is fine and should be allowed. It's one thing to disagree with someone in a thread but to ban them for having a different opinion is just idiotic. Val and I disagreed big time in this thread but I never once thought he shouldn't be allowed to post here because of his thought process.

Right. How do you discuss anything if you can't have differing opinions? How do you have any sort of discussion if you aren't allowed to potentially offend someone? I don't think making ad hominem attacks or trolling should be allowed -- but that's not because they offend people; it's because they are cheap tactics and derail discussion.

I also don't get the whole "playing as a woman makes the game better" mentality. They can throw that "50% of gamers are women" fake stat around all they want, the vast majority of people who play these games are men and most men would rather play as another man, that's not shaming anyone it's just the truth. As it is they give you the option to play as a woman in this game, you would think that would be enough but now they want it in all of the marketing etc.

I know some may say "well most gamers are men so why are we playing as a lesbian in TLOU2" but this is a different situation because we are continuing a story with a character, AC (other than Ezio) changes characters with every game, TLOU2 is us getting to go deeper with an established character who was a huge part of the first game and has now grown up,.

Yeah. Only 18% of people played as FemShep in Mass Effect, and she was unusually popular as a choice (I played as FemShep myself). Female gamers make up 50% of gamers but tend to congregate in different sorts of game genres (e.g., MMOs, mobile/casual titles, etc.). If I were to guess, I'd say maybe 20% of players, at most, would choose to play as the female character in AC Odyssey.

I mean, take a second and form a mental picture of a Spartan warrior. Picture someone who fought in the Peloponnesian war against the Greek army. Now, did you picture a man or a woman?

And you're right, it's an entirely different scenario, where you have a game that is centered around a female or gay character from the start. That's the story the developers are telling. I've got no problem with that, obviously (see avatar).

Life is Strange had lesbian character interaction, although there was some choice involved in how far you wanted to take it -- that was true both in the original game (Max and Chloe) and in the Before the Storm expansion (Chloe and Rachel). I played both twice and went full lesbian in the second versions, and I liked that better.

 

[Registered User 1]

I don't think that is true at all. I find it interesting that the religious angle is the only explanation for people being uncomfortable with homosexuality.

That doesn't mean you hate or even dislike someone who is. I honestly get weirded out when I see it, though to be fair, I don't really want to watch someone else make out in my face regardless of sexual orientation unless I'm trying to prime myself for amorous activity. I don't cast aspersions on people who (for whatever reason) feel/act in a way natural to them, and I would never advocate treating someone as less of a person solely based on sexuality. But trying to tell me I'm somehow backwards (I don't think you are saying this, I am being general) because I don't love to see it is a bit ironic, imo.

So many things we do are tied to natural evolutionary viable actions/ behaviors. A general revulsion makes sense if you want keep a species in existence. Sex and relationships are so controversial because they are based in mating ritual/ child rearing, so a natural tendency to reject actions out of line with that makes logical sense.

It's the same reason violence rates so low on the controversy scale. It's literally how we have survived threats to our lives through all of history. It's a massive part of how to survive and even thrive (in some contexts), and has been forefront to humanity for all it's existence (like sex). On the other hand, ironically, First-world nation populations largely have zero experience with that kind of real violence, so it's not very relatable, making it easier to take lightly. Granted, I HAVE personally seen that kind of violence, and it doesn't bother me in games (see reason 1).

That's MY two cents, anyway. I just know that calling people evil or wrong for having a natural reaction to an evolutionarily non-viable action is as wrong as hating people who can't help how they feel about people of the same sex. More understanding is needed.

I think there's wayyy too much evidence at this point proving it's predominantly psychological. Even if you pretend that the majority of culture, religion, programming and education hasn't been a form of aversion therapy for the past few thousand years, there are too many examples where it's not a biological emperitive to be psychological repulsion.

To begin with, there would be more obvious expressions in the animal kingdom where gay creatures are shunned by packs, they'd be killed, eaten and abused.

Another is in more progressive countries where it's openly 'normalised', the average on the Kinsey scale is gayer/bi-sexualer. Not only that, but the average on the Kinsey scale has been getting gayer for the past 50 years, and still is. Countries that have a higher average have fewer hate crimes, lower suicide rates, and a bunch of other crap.

There's also the Klein metric which is more accurate, but hasn't been around as long... But what does that have to do with it?

I guess I'm saying that there's 50 years of evidence that shows that people are getting gayer, or at least less straight, and that's not enough time for a massive biological shift, but there is enough evidence to prove that it's easy to disgust people with psychological cues. Feeling a discomfort, or awkwardness is generally associated with ingrained aversion therapy, and most people don't even notice it when it's going on around them.

The first time I fingered a girl, I literally threw up. After trying it a few times, I was like, "Oh, ok... It's like herd testing cattle... Can I get my arm in there." I'm not attracted to it, and I doubt I could ever get a boner when a vagina is too close to me, but it doesn't repulse me now. I just can't see them as sexual...

If you get exposed to something enough it would normalise it for you. If you had to watch gay porn each day for some reason, eventually you'd not even bat an eyelid. If it was biological, it wouldn't be that easy to get rid of.

Not to say that it couldn't ever possibly be a component, but experts in socio-bioligy largely disagree with you.

For it to be considered logical, there would have to be an adaptive reason for the biological expression, and a beneficial reason for the purpose of breeding. Since the gay subject wouldn't be considered a threat for the purpose of you producing kids, nor a threat to the kids, it's considered useless.

 

[Registered User 1]

Unless it turns out horrible, I'll definitely get the game. It's just not something I'm anticipating as much now because of their choice in the story section that they focused on in the trailer. I just don't like sex stuff in games. I stopped playing GoW3 because of it and skipped every part in TW3 where you were given those choices to do dirty stuff. I play games for fun and to escape reality, not to feel awkward...

Oh my god, you have to try Dream Daddy! You spend so much time buttering up the DILF's, that by the time any action happens, you just want them to stfu.

 

[Registered User 1]

Right. How do you discuss anything if you can't have differing opinions? How do you have any sort of discussion if you aren't allowed to potentially offend someone? I don't think making ad hominem attacks or trolling should be allowed -- but that's not because they offend people; it's because they are cheap tactics and derail discussion.



Yeah. Only 18% of people played as FemShep in Mass Effect, and she was unusually popular as a choice (I played as FemShep myself). Female gamers make up 50% of gamers but tend to congregate in different sorts of game genres (e.g., MMOs, mobile/casual titles, etc.). If I were to guess, I'd say maybe 20% of players, at most, would choose to play as the female character in AC Odyssey.

I mean, take a second and form a mental picture of a Spartan warrior. Picture someone who fought in the Peloponnesian war against the Greek army. Now, did you picture a man or a woman?

And you're right, it's an entirely different scenario, where you have a game that is centered around a female or gay character from the start. That's the story the developers are telling. I've got no problem with that, obviously (see avatar).

Life is Strange had lesbian character interaction, although there was some choice involved in how far you wanted to take it -- that was true both in the original game (Max and Chloe) and in the Before the Storm expansion (Chloe and Rachel). I played both twice and went full lesbian in the second versions, and I liked that better.

Did you ever play Fear Effect? Being a woman wasn't just the only option, but being a lesbian was integral to the gameplay...



Most of the advertising for the game was all bikinis and girls laying on-top of each other half naked.

 

[Andy]

Did you ever play Fear Effect? Being a woman wasn't just the only option, but being a lesbian was integral to the gameplay...



Most of the advertising for the game was all bikinis and girls laying on-top of each other half naked.

No, I missed that one. Kind of funny/silly.

At least the lesbian stuff has gotten a little more mature. ND is handling it well, fitting it into a context of a meaningful relationship, rather than using it just to titillate young men who drool at the idea of seeing a titty.

The first time I fingered a girl, I literally threw up. After trying it a few times, I was like, "Oh, ok... It's like herd testing cattle... Can I get my arm in there."

lol

 

[yankeessuck]

I am fine with titillating young men with some titty as well

 

[JinCA]

Right. How do you discuss anything if you can't have differing opinions? How do you have any sort of discussion if you aren't allowed to potentially offend someone? I don't think making ad hominem attacks or trolling should be allowed -- but that's not because they offend people; it's because they are cheap tactics and derail discussion.



Yeah. Only 18% of people played as FemShep in Mass Effect, and she was unusually popular as a choice (I played as FemShep myself). Female gamers make up 50% of gamers but tend to congregate in different sorts of game genres (e.g., MMOs, mobile/casual titles, etc.). If I were to guess, I'd say maybe 20% of players, at most, would choose to play as the female character in AC Odyssey.

I mean, take a second and form a mental picture of a Spartan warrior. Picture someone who fought in the Peloponnesian war against the Greek army. Now, did you picture a man or a woman?

And you're right, it's an entirely different scenario, where you have a game that is centered around a female or gay character from the start. That's the story the developers are telling. I've got no problem with that, obviously (see avatar).

Life is Strange had lesbian character interaction, although there was some choice involved in how far you wanted to take it -- that was true both in the original game (Max and Chloe) and in the Before the Storm expansion (Chloe and Rachel). I played both twice and went full lesbian in the second versions, and I liked that better.

The reason I call the 50% number fake (I should say misleading) is that it throws in women who only play candy crush type games or that play games on pogo etc and lumps them in with console gamers. It's used as ammo in an argument but it really doesn't apply to what's actually going on, it's sort of like the wage gap. They got that number by just coming up with what all men make vs all women, they didn't break it down to how people are paid for the same job but just what men make on average vs women and you can't have an honest/informed conversation using that kind of data. My mom plays pogo games all the time and just about everyone she plays with is a woman but if I handed her my controller and told her to play an AC game or any other modern game she'd be totally lost.
That doesn't mean there aren't female gamers but they do make up far less than 50% of console gamers.

 

[Frozpot]

I think there's wayyy too much evidence at this point proving it's predominantly psychological. Even if you pretend that the majority of culture, religion, programming and education hasn't been a form of aversion therapy for the past few thousand years, there are too many examples where it's not a biological emperitive to be psychological repulsion.

To begin with, there would be more obvious expressions in the animal kingdom where gay creatures are shunned by packs, they'd be killed, eaten and abused.

Another is in more progressive countries where it's openly 'normalised', the average on the Kinsey scale is gayer/bi-sexualer. Not only that, but the average on the Kinsey scale has been getting gayer for the past 50 years, and still is. Countries that have a higher average have fewer hate crimes, lower suicide rates, and a bunch of other crap.

There's also the Klein metric which is more accurate, but hasn't been around as long... But what does that have to do with it?

I guess I'm saying that there's 50 years of evidence that shows that people are getting gayer, or at least less straight, and that's not enough time for a massive biological shift, but there is enough evidence to prove that it's easy to disgust people with psychological cues. Feeling a discomfort, or awkwardness is generally associated with ingrained aversion therapy, and most people don't even notice it when it's going on around them.

The first time I fingered a girl, I literally threw up. After trying it a few times, I was like, "Oh, ok... It's like herd testing cattle... Can I get my arm in there." I'm not attracted to it, and I doubt I could ever get a boner when a vagina is too close to me, but it doesn't repulse me now. I just can't see them as sexual...

If you get exposed to something enough it would normalise it for you. If you had to watch gay porn each day for some reason, eventually you'd not even bat an eyelid. If it was biological, it wouldn't be that easy to get rid of.

Not to say that it couldn't ever possibly be a component, but experts in socio-bioligy largely disagree with you.

For it to be considered logical, there would have to be an adaptive reason for the biological expression, and a beneficial reason for the purpose of breeding. Since the gay subject wouldn't be considered a threat for the purpose of you producing kids, nor a threat to the kids, it's considered useless.

You just explained to me how you can normalize people to something they find biologically repugnant. You also explained how the more you normalize something, the more you get (which is an argument detractors would use). You can train people to accept just about anything. Doesn't those things are biologically helpful.

You can also desensitize yourself to death, and that is often detrimental to the continuation of a species/society, though in other uses it is a net benefit to specific groups or entities.

Whether someone is personally affected doesn't mean a generally societal perspective doesn't manifest, either. I cannot believe you wouldn't attribute significant biological, evolutionary weight to negative reproductive behaviors. Saying animals do it to is silly considering comparable societal sophistication. Especially when competition for mates is as feirce as it is.

I do wonder who funds the "experts" you refer to. You saying they largely disagree is just a statement by you. I suspect you will gravitate toward the studies that support your position, as most of us would. The issue is entirely too political to accept off-hand. I dont accept appeals to authority. I've heard too many overeducated fools spout streams of nonsense to accept the term expert anymore.

None of this is to try and denegrate people for their lifestyles, or sexual preferences, but to say that people are NOT hateful just because they find the act repugnant. I will not accept you or anyone attributing avarice to me because I don't enjoy the exposure.

If you made me watch gay porn in an attempt to forcably change my mind about something, I'd probably hate you for it, and come out of the experience with a more negative attitude about it in general. I'd have a stonger stomach for seeing it. That's all.

All the forced integration s*** does is make people distrust it. It needs to happen naturally. The second people smell agenda, their back rightfully goes up.

 

[Andy]

The reason I call the 50% number fake (I should say misleading) is that it throws in women who only play candy crush type games or that play games on pogo etc and lumps them in with console gamers. It's used as ammo in an argument but it really doesn't apply to what's actually going on, it's sort of like the wage gap. They got that number by just coming up with what all men make vs all women, they didn't break it down to how people are paid for the same job but just what men make on average vs women and you can't have an honest/informed conversation using that kind of data. My mom plays pogo games all the time and just about everyone she plays with is a woman but if I handed her my controller and told her to play an AC game or any other modern game she'd be totally lost.

That doesn't mean there aren't female gamers but they do make up far less than 50% of console gamers.

I agree completely. After reading the first couple lines of your post, I thought of the supposed wage gap, then smiled when you mentioned it. We're on the same page.


Here's some data, from a study called "Beyond 50/50: Breaking down the percentage of female gamers by genre."

The blue lines are the percentage of female gamers in each genre:

https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ks-down-game-genre-playerbases-by-gender.aspx

AC would fall in either open world (14%), sandbox (18%) or action RPG (20%). Not even close to 50/50.

I wonder what Match 3 is. Never heard of it. (Looked it up. It's like Bejeweled. Figures.)

 

[Spiritech]

Right. How do you discuss anything if you can't have differing opinions? How do you have any sort of discussion if you aren't allowed to potentially offend someone? I don't think making ad hominem attacks or trolling should be allowed -- but that's not because they offend people; it's because they are cheap tactics and derail discussion.



Yeah. Only 18% of people played as FemShep in Mass Effect, and she was unusually popular as a choice (I played as FemShep myself). Female gamers make up 50% of gamers but tend to congregate in different sorts of game genres (e.g., MMOs, mobile/casual titles, etc.). If I were to guess, I'd say maybe 20% of players, at most, would choose to play as the female character in AC Odyssey.

I mean, take a second and form a mental picture of a Spartan warrior. Picture someone who fought in the Peloponnesian war against the Greek army. Now, did you picture a man or a woman?

And you're right, it's an entirely different scenario, where you have a game that is centered around a female or gay character from the start. That's the story the developers are telling. I've got no problem with that, obviously (see avatar).

Life is Strange had lesbian character interaction, although there was some choice involved in how far you wanted to take it -- that was true both in the original game (Max and Chloe) and in the Before the Storm expansion (Chloe and Rachel). I played both twice and went full lesbian in the second versions, and I liked that better.

I picture Gerard Butler in a thong because of that stupid 300 movie.

 

[JinCA]

I agree completely. After reading the first couple lines of your post, I thought of the supposed wage gap, then smiled when you mentioned it. We're on the same page.


Here's some data, from a study called "Beyond 50/50: Breaking down the percentage of female gamers by genre."

The blue lines are the percentage of female gamers in each genre:

https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ks-down-game-genre-playerbases-by-gender.aspx

AC would fall in either open world (14%), sandbox (18%) or action RPG (20%). Not even close to 50/50.

I wonder what Match 3 is. Never heard of it. (Looked it up. It's like Bejeweled. Figures.)

So why the f*** are they being catered to like this? LOL I guess it's a way to try to expand the market but I wish these white knight types would give up their fake crusade.

 

[JinCA]

You just explained to me how you can normalize people to something they find biologically repugnant. You also explained how the more you normalize something, the more you get (which is an argument detractors would use). You can train people to accept just about anything. Doesn't those things are biologically helpful.

You can also desensitize yourself to death, and that is often detrimental to the continuation of a species/society, though in other uses it is a net benefit to specific groups or entities.

Whether someone is personally affected doesn't mean a generally societal perspective doesn't manifest, either. I cannot believe you wouldn't attribute significant biological, evolutionary weight to negative reproductive behaviors. Saying animals do it to is silly considering comparable societal sophistication. Especially when competition for mates is as feirce as it is.

I do wonder who funds the "experts" you refer to. You saying they largely disagree is just a statement by you. I suspect you will gravitate toward the studies that support your position, as most of us would. The issue is entirely too political to accept off-hand. I dont accept appeals to authority. I've heard too many overeducated fools spout streams of nonsense to accept the term expert anymore.

None of this is to try and denegrate people for their lifestyles, or sexual preferences, but to say that people are NOT hateful just because they find the act repugnant. I will not accept you or anyone attributing avarice to me because I don't enjoy the exposure.

If you made me watch gay porn in an attempt to forcably change my mind about something, I'd probably hate you for it, and come out of the experience with a more negative attitude about it in general. I'd have a stonger stomach for seeing it. That's all.

All the forced integration s*** does is make people distrust it. It needs to happen naturally. The second people smell agenda, their back rightfully goes up.

People are entitled to think what they want but I also think when people are basing those thoughts on something that's untrue it should be corrected. If your starting place is that being gay is a choice it's almost impossible for you to have an informed opinion because it's not a choice. Nobody would choose it if it were, who wants to worry about getting kicked out of the house as a kid and never feeling like you have anyone to talk to? At least people of color who feel alone in public have someone who looks like them when they go home, many gay kids live in constant fear that they will lose even the people that are supposed to love and protect them unconditionally. It's not a nice thing to have everyone tell you are a good person and then hear them later talking about how gay people are going to hell and how disgusting they are, you wonder if they'd still think you were a good person or disgusting and going to hell. Nobody would choose that, it's just the way some of us are and having a negative opinion about how people are just seems silly to me. Even without all of that when you ask straight people who believe that being gay is a choice they can never seem to remember the day they chose between being straight or gay lol.

 

[Andy]

So why the f*** are they being catered to like this? LOL I guess it's a way to try to expand the market but I wish these white knight types would give up their fake crusade.

Unfortunately, a lot of people have been indoctrinated in the feminist/SJW ideology by college professors and the media. It won't go away any time soon. It's crazy and authoritarian, completely the opposite of what "liberal" is supposed to stand for (freedom of thought and speech). I really think it's toxic. It's also pretty funny at times, because it's so r******d and juvenile. The white knight manginas, rushing to the defense of the poor female victims (who meanwhile are outstripping men in all sorts of areas). The holier-than-thou attitude gets on my nerves. They're so sure they've got the answer. Heck, they don't even have the facts, half the time.

I visited GAF today and saw a bunch of people joining back up because they'd been banned from Resetera for having the wrong opinion. The exodus has been good for GAF. It purged all the PC/SJW types and all the mods with agendas. Interesting change. I think I'll lurk there for a while.

 

[Spiritech]

I agree completely. After reading the first couple lines of your post, I thought of the supposed wage gap, then smiled when you mentioned it. We're on the same page.


Here's some data, from a study called "Beyond 50/50: Breaking down the percentage of female gamers by genre."

The blue lines are the percentage of female gamers in each genre:

https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ks-down-game-genre-playerbases-by-gender.aspx

AC would fall in either open world (14%), sandbox (18%) or action RPG (20%). Not even close to 50/50.

I wonder what Match 3 is. Never heard of it. (Looked it up. It's like Bejeweled. Figures.)

I'm curious as to when given a gender option, how many men choose to play as a women and women play as men. I played ME as both and depending on the game I will decide based on theme or who is more pleasant to look at or has the better outfits(my inner Bellybama).

 

[JinCA]

I'm curious as to when given a gender option, how many men choose to play as a women and women play as men. I played ME as both and depending on the game I will decide based on theme or who is more pleasant to look at or has the better outfits(my inner Bellybama).

I don't think I've ever chosen to play as a woman, I've played several good games that happened to have a female lead but I can't say the gaming experience was any better because of it.

 

[Registered User 1]

You just explained to me how you can normalize people to something they find biologically repugnant. You also explained how the more you normalize something, the more you get (which is an argument detractors would use). You can train people to accept just about anything. Doesn't those things are biologically helpful.

You can also desensitize yourself to death, and that is often detrimental to the continuation of a species/society, though in other uses it is a net benefit to specific groups or entities.

Whether someone is personally affected doesn't mean a generally societal perspective doesn't manifest, either. I cannot believe you wouldn't attribute significant biological, evolutionary weight to negative reproductive behaviors. Saying animals do it to is silly considering comparable societal sophistication. Especially when competition for mates is as feirce as it is.

I do wonder who funds the "experts" you refer to. You saying they largely disagree is just a statement by you. I suspect you will gravitate toward the studies that support your position, as most of us would. The issue is entirely too political to accept off-hand. I dont accept appeals to authority. I've heard too many overeducated fools spout streams of nonsense to accept the term expert anymore.

None of this is to try and denegrate people for their lifestyles, or sexual preferences, but to say that people are NOT hateful just because they find the act repugnant. I will not accept you or anyone attributing avarice to me because I don't enjoy the exposure.

If you made me watch gay porn in an attempt to forcably change my mind about something, I'd probably hate you for it, and come out of the experience with a more negative attitude about it in general. I'd have a stonger stomach for seeing it. That's all.

All the forced integration s*** does is make people distrust it. It needs to happen naturally. The second people smell agenda, their back rightfully goes up.

No I didn't. Biological homophobic traights aren't recognised in science. Just like biological racism has been debunked to pseudo science.

I'm saying that it IS a learnt behaviour. Akin to discomfort people feel when being naked.

Socio-bioligy recognises biological empathetic reactions in things like yawning, lactating at the sound of a baby, to killing the babies of other fertile females. All are adaptive traights that show beneficial aspects to evolution.

When I was 17 I joined a gay youth group, and after telling my story of my highschool experiences, I was asked to speak at a teacher's sexual health conference for the public education sector in Melbourne. From that, I got to meet a bunch of amazing people, and there were speakers ranging from neuroscientists, to psychs specialising in diagnosing factual biological phobias (and they aren't anything like a slight discomfort or awkwardness. They are an irrational terror, and are generally treated with medication, and recognise the biological 'malfunction' in the host and probates.)

After that I got invited back each year for the next 4 years I was involved.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I've read up on a lot of it, Ive been to countless talks about, and more importantly, Ive lived it. From having homophobic housemates who were then "normalised" to it.

I don't, and science doesn't accept non-gender based prejudices as a biological traight.

 

[Kvally]

I play as a woman whenever it is available. Only because I would rather look at the back side of a woman instead of a man. No other reason.

 

[yankeessuck]

I'm curious as to when given a gender option, how many men choose to play as a women and women play as men. I played ME as both and depending on the game I will decide based on theme or who is more pleasant to look at or has the better outfits(my inner Bellybama).

I played both too but Fem Shep is superior to male Shep because of better voice acting. So most people chose wrong.