I’m not mad, I’m taking this discussion to make clear that gay not always means different
I mean, it does. Does that mean “bad”? No, certainly not. It is different though; it is also not the overwhelming norm for humans.
I love back at the barnyard so godamn much.
1 Like
A reason why some straight men don’t like “the gays” is because they’re worried the gay man is going to treat them the same way THEY would treat a woman and THAT’S what makes them uncomfortable.
Soldier ain’t going to treat you like that because he doesn’t actually exist in reality so you should just get over it
1 Like
That’s over-simplistic and completely discounts the experiences of both straight and gay people.
My feelings on this are… difficult to unpack, so excuse the long post.
Objectively, I don’t care about Soldiers sexuality in the slightest. I’ve met too many people that ship Reaper and Soldier for me to really be phased at this point. I also think this was probably a good PR move for Overwatch. It makes them look more inclusive, which for their fanbase as a whole is a good thing. I do think the reveal was kind of cliche, but that’s neither here nor there.
Subjectively I don’t care that he is gay. Except: I doubt that was their original intention. People cite the picture he was looking at forever ago, but I feel like they actually probably just retconned a meaning out of that. However, that doesn’t really matter in the long run. Retcons happen all the time.
I do find it annoying that the “gay reveal” is happening in so much media nowadays. I understand different members of the community feel different about this, and that’s ok. However, for me, the reveals seem disingenuous. I feel like most of the writers for shows and games don’t do this because they actually just want to write a character that happens to be gay. It seems like they do it to be avant-garde. I don’t agree with representation for representations sake. I want it to be a natural choice by the authors, not something just to show how progressive they are.
Of course I don’t know if they always intended for him to be gay. I’m not a dev and I never had access to the lore plans behind the scenes. If they always had this planned, then I suppose it was well done. If not, its just kind of… lame.
Yeah in my opinion that was kinda forced like a last minute thing
2 Likes
You’re confusing “Normal” and “Abnormal” with “Usual” and “Unusual”. Situs inversus (Google it) is normal, but it’s still very unusual. The same thing applies to sexuality, and statistics regarding what percentage of people are homosexual is, at best, a massive red herring and does nothing to further the conversation. Whether or not you expect it is also completely irrelevant as well (But if you want to go that route, the entertainment industry has always made it a point to do what is the least predictable. Homosexual characters would fit that).
The problem with talking about whether or not you feel like it’s “pandering” is that there isn’t a way to include a gay hero without it being labeled as such. Even the mere announcement of a gay hero that Blizzard made a while ago was met with backlash and claims of pandering. Even Tracer, having the cushion of being a homosexual female, was met with criticisms of “pandering”. The problem isn’t “pandering”. “Pandering” is just an extraordinarily convenient way to mask the real issue, that we will get to next…
And this, I believe, is the most disingenuous thing you can possibly say in this conversation. You say they need to have a chance at representation, but you say “there are ways not to do it”, and that those ways include generating animosity and anger. The reason this is disingenuous is simple: The mere presence of homosexuality in America, and most places in the world, generates animosity and anger. It’s written in blood and in law all over our history as a species, and this idea of inclusiveness becoming mainstream is actually very new, and not even a global phenomenon. There is exactly no way to create a gay hero without it creating some level of animosity and anger. So this argument is simply saying that the only way to make a hero gay is to make them invisible… essentially keeping them in the closet, which is exactly the thing a forward-moving society wants to abolish, and that’s the whole point of being inclusive.
The real issue is, and has always been, that people just don’t want to see it. They mask it with these alternative rationales because simply admitting to their prejudices means they have no valid or intelligible reasoning.
4 Likes
“I’m not your father”
How the hell did you guys miss it? He basically admits it with his voice lines…
Nah if they wanted to look inclusive for brownie points they Would have used a new character. It takes a lot more guts to use an existing character like Soldier. Especially Soldier, really.
1 Like
It’s because they’re just virtue signaling and don’t actually care.
1 Like
You have a grossly simplistic understanding of other people. Just because my heart could be on the wrong side (didn’t have to look it up, that’s a normal college bio thing) doesn’t mean it’s normal. To upend social norms (which they are, regardless of the merits thereof) is going to upset people. If people are unwilling to engage in dialogue beyond “You’re no longer allowed to have expectations”, you’ll never see an actual resolution.
Beyond all of this: Yes, you can include gay characters without having it be controversial. DC Comics did it with Batwoman quite successfully and now she has her own show. It wasn’t a “shock-value” introduction, it was just her character. It also wasn’t relegated to a reveal almost 3 years later. It was a fundamental part and people still bought the book.
I think the real issue is that people don’t want to acknowledge bad storytelling when it rears its head. I couldn’t give a poo if S76 was gay or secretly a robot. To suddenly insert backstory for him in a piece that’s not even about him, and to have that insertion be a major definer of his character, is cheap and lazy. If people want representation then there should at least be acknowledgment that it deserves more than that kind of a cop out.
I don’t care if he’s gay. I care about the disservice that kind of story telling does for the people who need good story telling.
2 Likes
Honestly I was just sad how poorly the story with the reveal was handled. Up until this point the worst piece of media Overwatch produced.
2 Likes
Part of it is that people think it’s a PR stunt, part of it is because people are stupid, and part of it is just trolls who think they’re funny when in reality they’re boring.
1 Like
You’re missing the point and misinterpreting what was said. “Normal” in this context means “Naturally occurring”, not “Typical”. That was all. Also, nobody said “You’re not allowed to have expectations”, I said what you expect doesn’t matter to the outcome.
What part of Soldier’s reveal was for “Shock-value”? His sexuality was never revealed to begin with, as far as anybody’s concerned Soldier being gay has always been a part of his character just as much as the presumption he was straight. The time frame actually has its own poetic value as well: He was closeted for three years. Three years of people assuming he was straight. Apply that to real life examples of closeted gay men who people just assume are straight for years. Decades, even. Your expectation for the character is irrelevant compared to the outcome, and you actually just inadvertently revealed that the representation is more true-to-life than previously assumed.
And this actually isn’t even bad storytelling. This is called “World building” and has always been a part of storytelling since forever. It’s irrelevant that I know that in Futurama they have owl infestations instead of rats, but it gives us a deeper (If only for comical reasons) understanding of the world they live in. It’s pointless to know that there are Plumbuses in Rick and Morty and that they are a common household item. The point is to build a world that people can become immersed in, and that includes the backgrounds of the characters living in it. This argument is such a good example of “moving the goalpost” though.
3 Likes
I’m guessing you didn’t read the comic? There was backstory to it.
1 Like
This isn’t world-building; this is adding something to an already (ostensibly) established character. If they wanted to flesh out S76 then it should have been done far sooner. Tracer having a girlfriend was acceptable because it happened in pretty short order on game release and after she was already the target of people railing against her “overtly sexual” posing.
I like to cook. I’m in the process of opening a restaurant in my city. Something that I like to prepare and eat is insect based foods. I put roasted crickets on my salads when I have the chance and have even used them to make make flour in the past. It’s delicious and healthy. I would never dream of feeding someone insect based foods without telling them. I would never feed them and then say “YOU ATE BUGS!”
People have comfort zones and the ones who want my roasted crickets on their salads get them. I don’t surprise people with it after the fact. There is a larger population of people who eat insects in the world than there is gay people and I don’t know of a single person outside of myself and one or two adventurous people who enjoy eating bugs. Don’t expect people to accept something just because it is/should be normal. Some people just have personal reservations and surprising them is a great way to ruin their eventual acceptance. People have comfort zones and ignoring that is certainly not a way to help people move outside of them.
This isn’t “moving the goalpost”. This is expecting people to understand the game to begin with.
1 Like
People were hard-pushing for another LGBT character, so most of us saw it coming. Honestly, I think they just picked one and went with it. It could have just as easily been one of the other characters.
For me it’s a relief because there is less likely to be another one, which means Mercy will probably not be, and now the dev team can get to the much more important project of marrying Mercy off to a deserving suitor.
All we knew about Soldier up until this point was that he was a highly-skilled, all-American archetype soldier that led Overwatch before its downfall. You didn’t have any details as to who he was beyond “Captain America!” This wasn’t a very fleshed-out character by any stretch. That’s what this comic did, was add dimension to the character. That’s world-building.
I’m not sure you realize it, but the entire rest of your post is admitting that the reason you don’t like it is because it’s uncomfortable for you… You just admitted your problem with Soldier being gay is strictly homophobia. Thank you, and goodnight.
4 Likes
Don’t particularly care, but do think it is weird we now have two gay characters pining over their lost loves, and no straight ones. In fact the only straight characters in the game thus far are widow (who now is neither since no feelings) and we can assume Ana probably is because Pharah exists.
Junk and Hog could be gay. McCree and Hanzo could be gay. No way to say.
So, if they want to double down on gay romance, I don’t care, but I do think it is weird that they only touch on unrequited feelings when they are gay.