Steam Forums and Pride Month

[Zimzala]

14 minutes ago, Prexades said:

A beer company put a man who self-identifies as women into beer adverts - sales cratered

Star Trek's Seven of Nine, suddenly turned gay in the Picard series because of representation. Which was soundly rejected by the fans.

Gays have just as much right to live and love whoever they want. But if you ask for special treatment while also wanting to be seen as normal is getting on peoples nerves. You can't have both, pick one and stick with it.

How is being in a commercial asking for special treatment? That beer episode just exposed a bunch of bigots for who they really are and made the company realize it caters to bigots.

This is the first I have read about 7o9 being gay being a problem, so obviously not 'soundly rejected', again, just bigots being bigots and fanbois being fanbois over what they see as canon in their entertainment.

If you think these incidents indicate we should stop talking about non-cis rights, I think the exact opposite, these are prime examples of why we should be talking about this.

Edited June 2 by Zimzala

[LittleLeoniePrime]

Just now, FiveN9ne said:

similar example

porn and pride flags are not "similar examples" people.

In the eyes of a child some colors are not the same as explicit imagry

[Zimzala]

Just now, LittleLeoniePrime said:

porn and pride flags are not "similar examples" people.

In the eyes of a child some colors are not the same as explicit imagry

Exactly.

Trying to equate Pride with porn is completely disingenuous and harmful. 

[Silenzeio]

32 minutes ago, _Eclips3_ said:

Why do you want to control what others see? If you feel discomfort, don't visit the forums. Same way I wouldn't watch a horror movie at night then complain to the studio that I had a nightmare or something. I don't have a problem with it as I'm an adult now so I have no problem seeing it, but others might. This community is all a bout inclusivity after all, why not be inclusive to those who find discomfort?

Because those who find discomfort repeat the same tired x-phobic rhetoric that appears on most conservative outlets. 

Your 'same way' point is also one of the silliest attempts and straw-manning i've seen.

[FiveN9ne]

7 minutes ago, LittleLeoniePrime said:

porn and pride flags are not "similar examples" people.

In the eyes of a child some colors are not the same as explicit imagry

I see you don't get the comparison so let me explain. 

Twitch allows minors - promotes sexualized content - blurs sexualized content. Logically inconsistent

Warframe - promotes Pride which is an adult themed thing, you all say "M rated game" as a justification, but then you can't use M rated language in it. Logically inconsistent.

It's not comparing p0rn to pride flags, but the way the topics are perceived and justified. You guys are just being too literal, not sure if on purpose or out of ignorance.

EDIT: Just to add for further clarification, comparison and analogies is not the same thing as equating. Telling someone they're greedy as a pig is not the same as calling them a pig.

Edited June 2 by FiveN9ne

[_Eclips3_]

1 minute ago, Zimzala said:

Exactly.

Trying to equate Pride with porn is completely disingenuous and harmful. 

I never said pride was pornographic, I was just replying to someone who mentioned it and said that Twitch showing porn to younger audiences is morally wrong.

1 minute ago, FiveN9ne said:

I see you don't get the comparison so let me explain. 

Twitch allows minors - promotes sexualized content - blurs sexualized content. Logically inconsistent

Warframe - promotes Pride which is an adult themed thing, you all say "M rated game" as a justification, but then you can't use M rated language in it. Logically inconsistent.

It's not comparing p0rn to pride flags, but the way the topics are perceived and justified. You guys are just being too literal, not sure if on purpose or out of ignorance.

You said it better than me

[LittleLeoniePrime]

I see we won't come to a conclusion here 😐 .... child protection in a digital age is already a difficult topic and has nothing to do with pride month. People have been getting their hands on CoD underage even before steam existed. Accessing porn sites couldn't be an easier lie..

Just let us have our 30 days of a more colorful world my god....

Edited June 2 by LittleLeoniePrime

[Zimzala]

8 minutes ago, _Eclips3_ said:

I never said pride was pornographic, I was just replying to someone who mentioned it and said that Twitch showing porn to younger audiences is morally wrong.

And I never said you did, I made a statement of opinion, nothing more.

The words posted here are not always directed at you.

9 minutes ago, FiveN9ne said:

It's not comparing p0rn to pride flags, but the way the topics are perceived and justified. You guys are just being too literal, not sure if on purpose or out of ignorance.

Many people do perceive porn and and non-cis celebrations to be equivalent and many people do see pride flags as they see porn - 'degenerate'.

I live in the deep south of the US and I see this daily from the ignorant and bigoted population.

Edited June 2 by Zimzala

[Prexades]

vor 18 Minuten schrieb Zimzala:

How is being in a commercial asking for special treatment? That beer episode just exposed a bunch of bigots for who they really are and made the company realize it caters to bigots.

This is the first I have read about 7o9 being gay being a problem, so obviously not 'soundly rejected', again, just bigots being bigots and fanbois being fanbois over what they see as canon in their entertainment.

If you think these incidents indicate we should stop talking about non-cis rights, I think the exact opposite, these are prime examples of why we should be talking about this.

Pride month is the special treatment. I don't recall having a hetero pride month or did I miss it?

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

10 minutes ago, Prexades said:

I don't think it is having a net positive effect at this point. People who used to be positive or at least neutral about it, went to having a very negative opinion.

 

Based on my general understanding of the sort of complicated variables involved with having to draw such large and generalised conclusions of this nature. Since you know, we are dealing with humans, perceptions, competition, conflict of perceptions, opinions, generations, ideas around status quo, common sense, pop science, actual science, law, politics, etc. 

Generally speaking, based on what I know, I would conclude the effects are still a net positive overall. However there is going to be a polarising effect to be sure, and that can cause conflict and tension, so sometimes people can be neutral or even positive towards an idea or movement, but then they might veer to a negative or anti position. Again, lots of variables and quite complex, because such patterns happen frequently with different things, in different ways. I remember reading studies and research on the ways technology may have quietly improved racial perceptions, as in helped people become less racist. Sort of by accident. Some was more theory and hard to test and make hard claims about, but some were using more modern types of technology more relevant as far as later generations, that we can get better results from. I can't find any specific links right now, (I can try again later if you are interested), but some of the ideas touched on, was to explore how very young children, who live in areas that lack a lot of ethnic or racial diversity (traditional sense of the term) will form ideas if they still see people of different skin tones, colours and other such differences, interacting with people they are more familiar with (in their area, family, neighbours etc) in neutral, and neutral to positive lights. There was some general conclusion that such children, were less likely to hold racially discriminatory views. Though there were other variables I just can't recall right now. 

Thing is, racism hasn't really been "solved" in many countries, and a lot of people still make really bad arguments in defence of the status quo, even though the status quo tends to be ever changed, because and again, also based on my current best understanding, often their are big steps forward, but then at a certain point, progress can be stalled or slow down, and also there can be a bit of fluctuation. For example, the legal ability for consenting adults to marry each other. In some countries, people of different skin colour couldn't in the past. That changed, they could, but it didn't mean racism, discrimination did, or that people could have certain views based on their world views. Its still an important victory. Likewise, gay people being able to legally marry. Still many countries that don't allow it yet, but something that was fought for, and something more people are generally less hostile or non accepting about and generally okay with and tolerant of. 

The other neat thing though to consider, is young people and generational differences. For some young people, the world they enter, especially the world they understand when they start to become teenagers and young adults, can sort of be like a default of sorts. They sort of just are more open to accepting certain things, if they make sense, if they go to school, and watch television with neutral depictions (which can also include positive and negative examples, I can explain if that doesn't make sense), its just something they sort of accept. As a result, a lot of older generation ideas or holdovers can tend to die out slowly. However there is some stuff that can't really disappear forever because, well humans are kinda complex and there is a bunch of stuff we can feel and have hang ups over even in fairly neutral environments and most of us don't grow up in neutral environments, we have to contend with subtle, implicit and explicit groups, organisations businesses, political parties etc who often have incentivises to encouraging you to think and feel certain ways, about certain things. 

My general point here though, is that you can have some big improvements, positive trajectory, but also slower periods, but also there can be push back, but as far as net positives or net negatives? I mean there is a reason that a certain USA network news programs average age, is significantly higher than others... They also aren't necessarily representative let alone reflective of others, let alone much younger people. There are also ideas like loud minorities, and all that, also social media engagement issues as far as monetary/financial incentives to go with more extreme takes, to incite, which can lead to more engagement and so... Which is why the idea of a grifter has become more used and known in the last decade or so. Can make people polarised over issues, because of stuff we know from game theory and well just generally escalation and deescalation (on an individual scale and a larger scale). 

One day there is going to a gay President of the United States. Its going to probably be a little controversial, because some will claim they were only voted for because they are gay, but otherwise not qualified, some people will accuse them of being a safe gay person, who isn't actually that gay, or whose policies actually help gay people, and they are more of a token representation weaponised by the "party" they belong to, but either way, its still going to be a nice step ahead and victory of sorts. Some people will also demand to see their Birth Certificate for some reason. 

Anyway even something like mental health, whilst vastly improved in the last 100 years, still needs to be fought for, and with certain negative stigma attached, and there are still improvements and progress that is made, even in recent times. There will always be people who will argue that "well I was fine and neutral on this subject, but that side took it too far, so now I am against it" but, overall such improvements tend to make hard gains, and over are net positives overall. At least the specific ones that I have referenced, or alluded to. 

So if you are wondering whether public sentiment is at the risk of turning into a net loss, over LGBQT issues, I hope what I said can reassure you. Again, their may be some fluctuations, but I would argue thats more the result of a certain countries two party system and the polarisation that it creates, regardless of the topic, something many other countries deal with better and so can result in those countries "traditionalists" sometimes being more progressive than other countries, but also how most countries tends to move that way after generations and generations anyway. If you are also interested in some of the basis for the claims i made scientifically, also let me know, I was pretty general on purpose, but am usually thinking about some article or study that touched on something related to what I am suggesting or claiming. It might just take me a while to find (Google can be trash and filtering certain articles as far as finding the most scientific and neutral, in exchange for promoting pop science stuff thats usually more over dramatic and sensationalised. 

TL;DR version is that, as far as I know, on a topic I generally aim to know and learn about, in a scientific and sociological sense, the dial is shifting to still be net positive overall (well as far as certain countries acceptance/tolerance), but there can be fluctuations, but those are anticipated and understood at this point, because such a pattern exists elsewhere, historically around minority acceptance, understanding and tolerance. Which whilst not exactly the same (different minority groups, have different specific and often unique issues to try and overcome, can be cross referenced some generally with adequate skill, understanding and knowledge, and also eventually the passage of time too (as well as rhetoric used for and against and how similar they can often be, especially with hindsight). 

Take care and good day to you! 

[SneakyErvin]

42 minutes ago, Prexades said:

A beer company put a man who self-identifies as women into beer adverts - sales cratered

Star Trek's Seven of Nine, suddenly turned gay in the Picard series because of representation. Which was soundly rejected by the fans.

Gays have just as much right to live and love whoever they want. But if you ask for special treatment while also wanting to be seen as normal is getting on peoples nerves. You can't have both, pick one and stick with it.

While 7of9 being gay or not really wouldnt matter to me, the action of making it a thing that added zero to the show mattered to me, since well, it added absolutely nothing and turned out to be utterly pointless. The show "Eric" however brought up gay "awareness" in an enjoyable way that added something to the show, several things actually, while also managing to not turn cringe.

Not to mention what the parades have turned into during pride celebrations. It has gone from something normal to something that looks more like some porno add due to oversexualization. And it is also how it turns out in most media when they add LGBTQ+ characters, it is all about the sex and little else. Most seem like horney teenagers no matter the age of the character.

As you say, if you ask for special treatment when also wanting to be seen as normal you get on people's nerves, and you can really not expect both. Which also falls back to the parade thing and other pride event gatherings. You want to be treated as normal yet go out of your way to stand out. Why?

I have both gay and feminist friends, the gay friends have opted to step away from the LGBTQ+ movement since they dont want to be connected with it, and the feminists have stepped away from the feminist movement and dont want to be refered to as feminists anymoer. Both due to the extremes that are flooding both the movements these days. Dont get me started on the toxic S#&$ they've had to take from people within those movements after having stepped away.

Edited June 2 by SneakyErvin

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

13 minutes ago, Prexades said:

Pride month is the special treatment. I don't recall having a hetero pride month or did I miss it?

 

Thats every other month.

Its the default. 

This is an old recycled joke, from when people ask why isn't there a White History Month. 

I think you and the other poster are communicating past each other a little. Pride month is special treatment, the same way as some countries do have a black history month, and others don't. In some places, every month is black history month, because its just default history, and they might make up a larger population percentage, and even be a majority. Though many countries also have days of celebration for indigenous population. Though obviously some countries don't celebrate other countries indigenous peoples. There isn't a paradox though, because often certain "special" treatments are to encourage, and normalise the acceptance and de-marginalisation of a group and or minority. Some arguably overcompensate, but given historic treatment and even current modern day incidents and treatment... For some the idea that they are "overcompensating" and not doing enough could be seen as laughable. Especially when you involve corporate coopting, grifting and other complicated issues. 

In my own country, there is actually more of an emphasis on males mental health, especially towards other males, especially depression. Some might say, well what about woman? They can have depression too, and thats right, just as far as my understating of the statistics and numbers, and some other understood research, older males in my country tend to have a much harder time opening up about mental health and depression, so efforts and money specifically to try and combat that. Its not that they are special. Likewise, in my country, when it comes to domestic abuse, more resources tend to be aimed more towards woman as victims. Usually because of certain statistics, but it gets complicated, because woman can often be abusers too, and men victims, but often to the best of my understanding, well... There are a few things going on, which are unfortunate. Men underreport being victims of abuse, more than woman, and woman also underreport as well... Several stigmas associated regardless. When it comes to domestic abuse, men's abuse towards woman, are often more physically violent. Woman also generally rely more on men for living as well. This is troubling for a few different reasons for men, woman, everyone... Since a lot of woman are hesitant to report abuse, because they fear not having a home, or support, many men under report because they fear not being taken seriously. Many woman will end up being taken seriously, because they will literally have physical signs that they were abused, which is horrifying to think of, but then also horrible, is that all the victims of abuse who don't have obvious and overt physical signs, can also be downplayed and overlooked, because the abuse isn't physical enough, may be more emotionally or mentally damaging... 

That being said, most countries, societies, improve with time, as far as just generally being better overall, for its victims, male, female, gay, straight trans. Its just often we are playing catch up. For example, a lot of infrastructure relies on outdated ideas around relationships, which means that say, abuse on same sex relationships may offer unique issues not present in most heterosexual relationships, as far as having to deal with abuse. However now thats more normalised, countries with good research and awareness can start to implement better ways to help male, female and trans victims of domestic abuse. 

Also demystifying traditional gender ideas like "strong men don't complain and suffer in silence", whilst re-contextualising strength, will also often positively impact many men as well. Its why when we often see improvements primarily for marginalised peoples and minorities, there are often several benefits and positive benefits for people in a majority that may have been struggling in other ways (or where they might have been a minority in some other way, like with mental health, being poor etc). Usually its only really a few people who benefit directly from some sort of status quo that tend to push ideas that helping certain people harms you, well that and certain people with certain world views that tend to crumble when confronted with certain scientific or historic known variables. 

So its not really special treatment, in the sense that its not necessarily better or greater than, but it does bring attention and ask for people to contextualise its existence. For example, hypothetically, but also in practice with a minority, de-marginalised groups situation. Also extending up to a few different minorities or health/mental health issues. Its why DE does charity for a few different causes, fundraisers. Like to do with the homeless, indigenous people, certain illnesses/cancers. Similar questions can be applied. Well, why only homeless people? Why not people in homes too? That one is straight up obvious. More sincere argument can be say... why not raise awareness for testicular cancer or bowel cancer and not just breast cancer. Has more merit, probably has something to do with background negotiations and availability of partners. See a lot of people often complain about double standards, but often its born from spite, rather than any actual genuine desire to see more awareness for say mens heath awareness, except... some people and some countries actually do try to implement more awareness for other cancers, including some that affect men more proportionately, which is sincerely great to see happen. In my country, bowel cancer has been getting a lot of attention lately, which is great. Its also its own interesting conversation though, because I have heard some decent explanations, and it can depend country to country, and there are also a lot of charitable organisations that are just straight up shady, including some of the cancer ones... Mixed bag. 

TL;DR, do some marginalised people, or minorities, or groups that face more issues, problems, oppression, etc than others need "special treatment", to help change some traditional attitudes, ideas, perceptions? That also may be relevant as far as normalising acceptance and tolerance, where as say majority accepted ideas and behaviour are already widely accepted and common? Or is this just the big Gay Agenda Army wanting special treatment, to spite the straight people? See some people think the latter and thats unfortunate. 

 

 

[Venus-Venera]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Silenzeio:

I'm gonna be Captain Obvious when i say that Steam forums are already a toxic pit

actually strange. because in the steam forum in particular, mods, devs, etc. can permanently ban people left and right for no reason, so that in the end every page is filled with hymns of praise.

A lot of companies do that there to mislead public opinion. It's about business.
But if you complain that you've been banned permanently without giving any reason simply because of honest negative criticism, then you get an automatic message from a Valva employee with similar content: "In game forums, the developers' rules apply. They can make up whatever rules they want and ban you for them."

Edited June 2 by Venus-Venera

[Zimzala]

1 hour ago, Prexades said:

Pride month is the special treatment. I don't recall having a hetero pride month or did I miss it?

How is celebrating loudly special treatment?

And how is it any different than Christmas? As an anti-theist, it sickens me, but I put up with it, for example, without telling anyone they shouldn't be throwing a party over their hijacking of the winter solstice for their superstitions.

Pride is just people celebrating their lives and raising awareness of their very real uphill battle just to be treated equally.

If you are tired of hearing about it, oh well, I am just as tired of hearing about Christmas, Valentines, Easter and Lent, but I would never propose any of those that celebrate it of getting special treatment, they get the same as everyone, the right to talk about and celebrate who they are and what they hold dear.

"The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them."

Edited June 2 by Zimzala

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

Since I anticipate that this thread may be locked in the future. (but hopefully not, because good to discuss tense issues I think)

I just wanted to quickly say, that a while back, some people wanted to research, study, learn etc why and how people with self admitted homophobia, would sort of change, adjust or just, be, when paired, and put to interact with some actual gay people. It was all voluntary and all that. No one was forced or anything. They generally found that people with homophobia will often dramatically soften and lessen their stance, when they actually have real first hand exposure and neutral interactions with gay people. A lot of their assumptions, perceptions, and ideas, soft of dissolve or get replaced or adjust, just by being exposed to actual real people who also happen to be gay. Its not really a crazy concept, but people are pretty empathetic and will be quite chill when they get first hand experiences with people from different cultures, backgrounds, orientation. Even if the talking head on the television is trying to convince them that everyone else is out to get them and their pension, and yadda yadda. 

If your best friend reveals one day that they are gay, or trans, or non binary? Are they still not your best friend? What about your child, future or otherwise? Even if you think "some people take it too far" or "what about this other group", always a generally good idea to go for the empathetic and understanding route, especially if you have a good read on history or the struggles some people have faced over what should be relatively unimportant info. 

Take care all! Be Gay! Do Crime! (if you read that too literally, worth researching). 

[Genitive]

59 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

While 7of9 being gay or not really wouldnt matter to me, the action of making it a thing that added zero to the show mattered to me, since well, it added absolutely nothing and turned out to be utterly pointless.

If homosexuality bothers you unless it's relevant to the plot then I don't know what to tell you. Some characters are just going to be gay, just as some people in the real world are gay. We live in a more and more tolerant society and you will see more and more queer characters in fiction. That's just reality.

 

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

Not to mention what the parades have turned into during pride celebrations. It has gone from something normal to something that looks more like some porno add due to oversexualization. And it is also how it turns out in most media when they add LGBTQ+ characters, it is all about the sex and little else. Most seem like horney teenagers no matter the age of the character.

That's cherry picking. There are plenty of pride parades without oversexualisation. People you're describing don't represent everyone, making blanket statements is unfair and harmful.

[asdf3011]

3 hours ago, _Eclips3_ said:

Why do you want to control what others see? If you feel discomfort, don't visit the forums. Same way I wouldn't watch a horror movie at night then complain to the studio that I had a nightmare or something. I don't have a problem with it as I'm an adult now so I have no problem seeing it, but others might. This community is all a bout inclusivity after all, why not be inclusive to those who find discomfort?

Agreed, it's a celebration that is sexual in nature. It's about peoples sexual preferences and not everyone wants to see themes about sexual preferences plastered all over the game they play and in their gaming news feeds. And what about the younger audience that play the game? I used to play this game on my Xbox in my early teens (for legal reasons since it's rated M, under my parents supervision in the living room), I don't think it's appropriate to advertise peoples sexual preference and what they do in their bedroom to legally speaking, children.

Are people really forgetting that a straight kiss also shows a "sexual" preference? Just cause you can use the word sexual to talk about about something does not change the nature of a sfw action/item/event into nsfw one. Using words to twist the perception of something that is child friendly like a colorful flag into something only for adults is kinda gross. Kids can be lgbt too, and I hope you will see the problem if you used the same logic to describe them just being lgbt as being sexual. 

[(PSN)Unstar]

3 hours ago, _Eclips3_ said:

How is it bigoted? I'm very happy people are no longer being persecuted for having the freedom to be who they are,

 The entire point of Pride is to resist the status quo where people are still being persecuted.  I can understand how if you thought such persecution only existed in the past how you might misunderstand Pride, so hopefully this helps clarify that.  Things are rough out there for a lot of queer people who just want to live their lives without being attacked physically, economically, and systemically.

 

3 hours ago, _Eclips3_ said:

this celebration involves sexual themes and I don't think it's appropriate advertising it

There are certainly some Pride events that contain adult content, but it would be an over-generalization to suggest that Pride as a concept contains sexual themes.  The core focus of Pride is letting people love who they love and validating their subjective experiences of personhood; that's no more sexual than your average wedding, which plenty of children participate in.

[TARINunit9]

3 hours ago, _Eclips3_ said:

but as I mentioned before, this celebration involves sexual themes

Reading your comments makes me think of the song "everyone's a little bit racist." 

The idea that homosexuality is "inherently sexual" is itself a discriminatory belief. It's implying that homosexuality is more lustful, more carnal, and therefore distinct from heterosexuality

I'm not calling YOU a bigot for believing it, but the person who came up with it probably was

[-ShadowRadiance-]

As a gay guy.

I heavily dislike the pink and rainbows everywhere that says "look at us! We are pride friendly! GIVE US UR MONEY"

Cause face it. Thats the sole reason corperations do it. Any that say otherwise are liars.

So. At least this gay guy is sick of seeing pride everywhere. 

 

[Letter13]

Gonna chime in with my $0.02.

A lot of people seem to not understand the point of pride month and the reason why the LGBTQ+ community is celebrated during this time, so hopefully this will clear some things up.

It's not about showing off one's sexuality or sexual preferences. It's not about 'forcing it down your throat.' It's about showing support for individuals and groups of people who have historically (and in some cases still are) persecuted because they've realized that they're not heterosexual and/or cisgendered. There are places in the world where being bisexual or homosexual is a crime, resulting in imprisonment or worse, a death sentence. 

Pride month is about letting people know that it's OK if you're not heterosexual or identify as the gender you were born as, that it's OK to like or be attracted to those of the same sex as you, that there's nothing wrong or abnormal about it and that you should not be persecuted, punished or shamed for it.

And to those who are saying 'But you shouldn't be showing this stuff to KIDS!' well you're kind of really wrong there. Children, especially teenagers, need to know that these sorts of things are OK, that they're not weird or abnormal or broken if they don't fall into the heterosexual/cisgendered category. They need to know that maybe it isn't 'just a phase' and that they shouldn't feel ashamed by the way they feel or who they are.

26 minutes ago, -ShadowRadiance- said:

I heavily dislike the pink and rainbows everywhere that says "look at us! We are pride friendly! GIVE US UR MONEY"

Cause face it. Thats the sole reason corperations do it. Any that say otherwise are liars

So I guess we should just ignore how DE takes the proceeds of events like this and donates them towards nonprofit organizations like the Rainbow Railroad, Trans-Lifeline and the Trevor Project?

 

Edit: Also, thread cleaned up a bit. Discussion on this thread will be allowed to continue; please avoid name-calling, verbal attacks against other users, or posting rule-violating content, as these behaviors will result in post removal.

Edited June 2 by Letter13

[Joylesstuna]

1 minute ago, Letter13 said:

So I guess we should just ignore how DE takes the proceeds of events like this and donates them towards nonprofit organizations like the Rainbow Railroad, Trans-Lifeline and the Trevor Project?

Even evil companies give to charity. It doesn't make up for anything.

To be more on topic, seeing pride stuff in game just makes me happy. Warframe doesn't exactly go all out so not sure why people get so angry.

[(PSN)Unstar]

4 hours ago, Prexades said:

Pride month is the special treatment. I don't recall having a hetero pride month or did I miss it?

To answer your query in good faith, every day queer people are persecuted for just for existing.  There are plenty of aspects of personal safety such as being able to get and keep a job, being able to get housing, and being able to hold hands with your spouse without being assaulted or threatened that queer people statistically have less access to than non-queer people.  Pride is an act of resistance against that status quo.  It's an attempt to raise visibility for the issues we face and money for the causes that aim to make things not as bad for us while creating community.

I can understand how it might look like special treatment if you're not familiar with the difficulties the queer community faces.  When I was a kid, my sibling was beat-up on the playground.  And my parents doted on that sibling and bought them a present to make them feel better.  And I got jealous about why they got a present and I didn't.  I thought my sibling was getting special treatment...and in a way, they were.  But there was a good reason for that special treatment.  I hadn't received a beating, and thus I didn't need something to lift my spirits the way they did.  Similarly, I think sometimes folks who aren't queer don't realize that the "special treatment" of Pride exists in response to the significantly worse treatment that queer people experience, which Pride doesn't come close to making up for.

If I could, I would gladly trade Pride in for the safer experiences that non-marginalized folks get to take for granted year round.

My genuine apologies that you were name-called; it didn't help anyone or anything for that to happen.  That said, I hope that in the same way that I haven't turned my back on all straight and cis folks because of acts of aggression from some of their peers, that you won't let the aggression from a few misguided queer folks deny your love and support to the overall queer community who are in great need of more safety.

Edited June 2 by (PSN)Unstar
removed some sentences that distracted from the main points

[-ShadowRadiance-]

15 minutes ago, Letter13 said:

I guess we should just ignore how DE takes the proceeds of events like this and donates them towards nonprofit organizations like the Rainbow Railroad, Trans-Lifeline and the Trevor Project?

As companies who produce tobacco and alcohol also donates to respective AA groups for it. But still make money on it.

You dont want my honest answer. ^^

[(PSN)FrDiabloFr]

8 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

To answer your query in good faith, every day queer people are persecuted for just for existing.  There are plenty of aspects of personal safety such as being able to get and keep a job, being able to get housing, and being able to hold hands with your spouse without being assaulted or threatened that queer people statistically have less access to than non-queer people.  Pride is an act of resistance against that status quo.  It's an attempt to raise visibility for the issues we face and money for the causes that aim to make things not as bad for us while creating community.

I can understand how it might look like special treatment if you're not familiar with the difficulties the queer community faces.  When I was a kid, my sibling was beat-up on the playground.  And my parents doted on that sibling and bought them a present to make them feel better.  And I got jealous about why they got a present and I didn't.  I thought my sibling was getting special treatment...and in a way, they were.  But there was a good reason for that special treatment.  I hadn't received a beating, and thus I didn't need something to lift my spirits the way they did.  Similarly, I think sometimes folks who aren't queer don't realize that the "special treatment" of Pride exists in response to the significantly worse treatment that queer people experience, which Pride doesn't come close to making up for.

If I could, I would gladly trade Pride in for the safer experiences that non-marginalized folks get to take for granted year round.

My genuine apologies that you were name-called; it didn't help anyone or anything for that to happen.  I won't defend the act, but I understand why some folks lash out like that at times; over time, it can really wear a person down needing to be as hyper-vigilante as queer folks do, and sometimes folks lack the energy to be constructive.  Again, I'm sorry it happened.  That said, I hope that in the same way that I haven't turned my back on all straight and cis folks because of acts of aggression from some of their peers, that you won't let the aggression from a few misguided queer folks deny your love and support to the overall queer community who are in great need of more safety.

With all due respect unstar, i get your point i was persecuted for a long time due to my skin color, the main thing is people weaponise anything they can, nobody cares who you like, what you identify as, what color you are but any slight difference people try to use that to gain an advantage ie in argument, in a social situation etc, i have to be careful what i say (he who shall not be named) stealth deleted comments

Edited June 2 by (PSN)FrDiabloFr