@RichardPini That was a good, satisfying and very just response.
Davrille said: Gay men aren't supposed to have anything to do with women, either.(There's been some of that expressed in this thread.) Not just sexually; the stereotype of a gay man who is jealous of a woman/women because they're competition for straight men, and is disdainful of women in general, can still be found in various media.I have a gay male friend who has a ton of female friends, but still refers to the vagina as 'the hairy hatchet wound'. I know his disdain for women as 'competitors', but these, I think, are connected with his frustration for not being 100% accepted as a person in society. Finding out a guy is straight can kind of feel like 'why aren't you playing on my team, you're on the side of the Imperial Army of Preferance to the Evil Women *grumblegrumble* and I understand his frustration. Gay people are still seen as deviations, something strange, something sexualized, and they're the first to know: Gay people question all the time why they are gay, and they are often fighting a lonely battle, both internally and externally. But as to stereotypical gays in media: Aye, I agree. Which is why we need to see more of them - to deconstruct those stereotypes and show the world that non-straight people are regular people, they just fall in love a bit differently than what we consider the 'norm'. But we can't do this without representation. (We also need more stories where 'being gay' isn't a part of the story driven plot.)
Davrille said: I get the impression that many fans (from various places) who are disappointed over the lack of a "gay character/couple" in EQ want that "gold star" gay. (ie, no sexual interaction with a female, ever) character/relationship.I agree with @Tam that this is a horrible term. This is the first time I've heard it, and it sounds terribly outdated. What we're asking for in games, movies, etc isn't "gold star gay", it's proper representation. Gay males don't fall in love with, or have sexual relations with women. They will not feel represented in a bi/omni character. And there's a chance neither will see representation in the omnisexual elves, because if everybody is omni, then nobody is really deviating.
Tam said: I know SO many people who wonder why labels are important in the first place, and think we should just erase them all. But human society doesn't work that way. We like labels, we like putting people in boxes, to help us better understand our world.Requesting 'label-removal' is another form of ignorance, in my opinion, because it's pretending a problem isn't a problem. When it's still very much a problem.
Tam said: I personally don't care if they call a same-sex pairing "gay" in the comic. They shouldn't do that. Cuz elves aren't gay.Aye.
Tam said: But if they're omnisexual, you'd think we'd see more same-sex pairings than there are.Dingdingding This is the 'missing link' for me. It's been properly explained with recognition and how elven societies work depending on external elements. It makes me think of (but is not related to, seeing how RP explained it, also taking into consideration that ElfQuest originated in the 70's and needed to cater to a probably more conservative audience than the one we see today - that is a guess from my end though) the argument game developers tend to respond with on the topic of representation: 'We recognize the issues of minorities and LGBT, and those kind of stories exist in our universe, but those stories are not the ones we're going to tell for this game.' I believe we're getting somewhere though, like with the BioWare games. But the industry is still terribly conservative. (And Hollywood is a joke.)