Soldier can’t be gaydared because queer stereotypes don’t apply to every queer person. Pharah isn’t the most Egyptian person ever simply because she comes from Egypt; in fact, much of her visual design is more styled after (largely Western) science fiction armor suits, not any hints to her heritage.
Sure, persecution may heighten one’s senses to possible danger and potential allies, but at the end of the day it’s becoming harder, even now, to visually define a person’s sexuality. As a trans person I do keep my eye out for fellow trans peeps, making sure to stick around them, even if I don’t know them, and make sure no one is giving them the side eye. But sometimes it is just the case that there are masculine cis women and feminine cis guys. Making assumptions can be helpful but it’s not a sure fire way to make a correct course of action, even half of the time. It’s not a matter of how visibly gay Soldier is, because his character isn’t about that and his personality is generally utilitarian and single-focused. His design reflects this.
Like, for all you know, Tracer keeps her hair short because it helped her fit all of it to a fighter jet helmet she needed for the Slipstream, or reduces drag as she dashes from place to place. An entirely straight character could have Tracer’s design and it would still make sense.
You also can’t forget that we’re talking Soldier’s time as well, not now. Homophobia is probably on the decline. With the rise of sentient AI and the butchering of a good portion of humanity, interhuman conflicts would likely be rare, if not all but eradicated. A guy like Jack Morrison is going to be targeted for bigger issues, like unsanctioned missions and reports of human rights abuses- which weren’t strictly his fault, but certainly not properly addressed by him and allowed to continue.
It’s not being political to reveal a character as gay. It’s political to assume that all statements or reveals are MEANT to be political. Like real people, game people are just people. It would be more political if Soldier suddenly began having voice lines or sprays about it out of nowhere. But considering the fact that his personality remains just as closed as ever and his skins haven’t changed either, the reception of Soldier’s reveal really starts to feel like it’s just the result of faulty storytelling.
The word “stereotype” is simply an attempt by politicals to make that which is normal taboo. Every demographic is going to traits that are statistically more present among its individuals. Not only is it ok to acknowledge these statistics. But it is also necisary to be honest about them in instances where they indicate problems. And you can do both of those things without ignoring those who differ.
For example, White Americans are over represented in unprovoked, non-organised mass shootings. Is this a stereotype, or a statistic?
Stereotypes are widely propagated notions of a specific subject, usually of people or places. While there could be certain truths to some stereotypes, the majority are incorrect- and many are harmful. Even if any one stereotype isn’t stigmatized, and in fact accepted by individuals outside the community, it may force others to conform, or otherwise question the validity of their identity, if they don’t fit within the generally accepted ideas people have about them.
While one might say it has been an overwhelmingly white majority when it comes to the perpetrators of mass shootings, it would be more likely to say Americans are the most likely to enact a mass shooting. Stating that white Americans are more likely to have access to assault style weapons is more a reflection of very real gaps in economic class, and less a reflection of a mentally unstable white population. The mental health problems that spawn these horrible acts are common among every race, and blaming solely whites or solely gun availability is an halfhearted acknowledgement of the effects that does nothing to actually understand or target the causes.
Getting back to Soldier, being traditionally masculine as opposed to effeminate doesn’t invalidate his sexuality. If there being no prior indications of it seems “political” to you, you may want to consider how you examine the topics of sexual orientation. It isn’t an attempt to push for policy changes or achieve equality. Creating diversity even within the bounds of the LGBTQ community may inadvertently change the attitudes people hold towards it, but to say political motivation in and of itself being the entire goal of Vincent’s introduction seems, to me at least, wildly incorrect. I’ll say it one more time, the story itself is flawed, not the reveal.
One more thing: you seem to have a habit of calling anyone with an ideology a “political”. As though you speak as someone who is firmly non-political. Is not holding a view on a certain population whose ideals are opposite to your own, itself political? I’m an atheist, but the fact that I am aware of and acknowledge the concept of a god or gods in some way makes me involved in theology, despite my rejection of an actual religion to worship. Interested to hear your thoughts.
Let me ask one question: Why is it that every time I bring up the fact that Soldier 76 wasn’t coded gay, people assume I mean he’s “traditionally” masculine?
Ok, I actually have two questions: What exactly are people with the necessary neurological defects to be a right or left winger talking about when they say "traditionally masculine/feminine?
Because it’s been heterosexual tradition for centuries to closely relate one’s sexuality with their gender identity, and vice versa. You could easily draw Macbeth into this, but any look at a teen drama in which girls are pressuring their hopeless friend into asking out a boy can do that without a trip to the library. In many families, if you aren’t dating someone of the opposite sex, you’re either an embarrassment or a liability, and culture has largely grown around this idea to the point where entertainment industries almost NEVER avoid having a romantic subplot.
There generally isn’t a whole lot of coding sexualities without making characters visibly opposite to the norms of their gender. There are exceptions- Commander Bad*ss from “The Punchline is Machismo” appears heteronormatively straight, but is actually bisexual, (and endearingly incapable when it comes to romance) something far better explored throughout his interactions and personality in that comic than it ever is for Soldier. But again, this is an exception. So when you say that none of your friends could scan the gay out of Soldier, all you’re saying is that he didn’t identify with any gay stereotypes, i.e effeminate males, like Tracer as a masculine female.
When you say you don’t mean traditional gender archetypes, what do you mean? How would you describe a queer coded male character without dipping into stereotypically “gay” stuff?
Also, as for your friends, I don’t think their magical gaydar applies to fictional characters with as little characterization as Soldier. We simply haven’t seen him enough in casual situations to tell anything. And I don’t think anyone is arguing that he’s straight passing.
Also, we literally have never seen him during his youth. Who knows what he was like. Maybe he liked wearing skinny jeans. Maybe he would put on a single coat of clear nail polish. He certainly appears well groomed in his SC skin, and that is another (unfortunate) stereotype that works against both straight and queer men. But here we are…
So your politics makes you assume I think that way? Because I’m straight, I can’t believe a fat construction worker with a beard likes men?
Well, I don’t really know how to explain this to you: Someone’s sexuality can be indicated by the choices they make as a result of their desires. The clothing they wear, the way they cut their hair, and the other items they carry are the most common indicators.
I don’t know exactly what they saw in each character that indicated these things. But I believe them. Blizz wouldn’t be the first company to treat homosexuality like a hat that can be plopped on any character for political points.
Before this, I was actually on board with Soldier being gay. I wrote threads about how anyone who was automatically upset about this needed to stop being political slaves.
I would describe them as gay coded, which is not the same thing as feminine. It’s true that traps fetishise emasculation, but even they are not strictly homosexual or bisexual.
A gay man doesn’t behave like a woman. But he does behave like a gay man. It’s ok to acknowledge the differences. It isn’t ok to treat gay like just another word. It describes a group of people.
I do. And it’s exactly what we’re trying to describe to you. I bet my ear they would also easily clock Zarya as a butch lesbian. Potentially Pharah too.
Tracer is a spry tomboy with short hair and helix piercings. She’s the ultimate “soft butch”. Of course no one was surprised she’s gay. She’s almost stereotypical.
because… homosexuality IS a hat. If hat is the stand-in term for “aspect of a character”, really all you need to do is make compelling story around that character. Stories like “Simon vs. The HomoSapiens Agenda” or “The Gentleman’s Guide to Vice and Virtue” have focused on the interaction between homosexuality and the social attitudes toward it as a distinct part of their storyline, and by extension, the tie-ins of gay culture that have formed as a response. But as said before, there are some homosexual characters who will simply NOT appear gay unless seen in romantic context with a man. Some stories are just about a dude who loves a dude, and whether they’re wearing business suits or cowboy clothes, gay is who they are.
Your argument, if I’m correct, can be summarised by the following: “Soldier: 76’s sexuality was revealed on a political basis, supported by the fact that there were no visual or story cues that my gay friends or myself could detect that indicate his sexuality.” So when asked if “my politics” make me assume your line of thinking, yes, your beef with Blizzard over not making Soldier clearly gay from the start in a quest for press recognition would lead me to believe that you think coding traits into character design is integral to understanding them and their story. It’s like saying Symmetra having autism is a political move as well, simply because it isn’t discernible from her base design of “dancer/architect”. It isn’t. Because autistic isn’t something that can be effectively communicated through visual design. Sure, in retrospect, the visor and earmuffs may cue you into her sensory issues, but EVERYONE wears a visor in this game.
Any gay character or person. There’s your example.
Actually the said Zarya is bi. They did say Pharah is a lesbian.
I never said gaydar was a magical power. But it is a survival mechanism. These people’s lives depend on their ability to determine who is and isn’t gay. It is a skill honed under the most dire of stakes. It doesn’t matter if you trust them. I do.
@PeacefulYew
What I’m saying is that when you change the sexuality of a character you change that character and their story on a fundamental level. It’s not that sexuality should determine a person’s place in the world. It’s that sexuality determines how they will behave.
Let me try to clarify something: It’s not that Soldier 76 is straight because he wasn’t coded gay. It’s that Soldier 76 is coded straight. He dresses and behaves like a man who wants women, and not like a man who wants other men. Straightness affects the design of a character just as much as gayness.
Look, I’m not the left wing equivalent an SJW. I can remember how to tie my own shoes, which makes me too smart to get upset about things like Sigma’s toes or the Tracer being gay. My problem comes from political pandering of every kind. My primary reason is because both the left and right wings are irredeemably corrupt. You can’t support either “side” without supporting injustice. And therefore I have a moral obligation to treat right and left wingers like the world would be a better place if they were wiped out. If there must be injustice, let it be done to those who caused it to exist.
That being said, I don’t consider a character being gay to be a political. Or autistic. Or a furry. Or trans. Those people exist indifferent of politics. In fact most of the problems in their lives would be solved if we could just treat politics the way it deserves to be treated.
I also think they did it pretty poorly. An old man who’s past the point of dating… backtracking on the sexuality is just kinda lame, especially since it wasn’t even an origins comic. Like what was the point?
As for the OP. People have a really hard time telling if I’m gay, too. But I don’t think having feminine traits are bad, either. I don’t think characters like bunker from dc, Lafayette from true blood, or Wiccan from marvel are bad characters but it’s how you write them… soldier just kinda felt forced. I’d rather them have written a good character that happened to be gay… aiwei from korra is a good example. But backtracking a whole character arc about how soldier was gay felt really lame and like pandering. They could’ve just released a new character and have it be part of the lore q&a about that character
For real, I’m asking what makes someone gay coded to which you answer “nothing, they just are”. If I wanted to write a grizzled old soldier character who is also gay, what would I need to do, according to you?
Well sometimes they’re wrong. Sometimes gay people don’t fit their expectations of how a gay person acts or looks.
s76 isn’t designed as “a gay character”, he’s designed as a soldier. I have 0 reason to believe the devs randomly chose him, considering there was evidence since launch. And yes, plenty of people saw him as gay before then anyway.
Ya. Sometimes they’re wrong. Maybe they are this time. All twelve of them wrong about the same thing after all being right about Tracer.
He’s designed to be an old, disenfranchised, vigilante, paternal, soldier. Even if the straight coding is questionable, why did they make him a father figure? Considering how many peo… free ranged clusters of poorly allocated biological matter have a problem with straight, white, men these day, maybe Blizz thought it would be a good idea to tape the word gay to one of them.
And are any of the people who thought he was gay before the same people who seem to think D.Va is a lesbian because her room is next to her female team mate’s? Remember, some gay people never developed gaydar because they don’t live in a region where they need it.
I live in Eastern Europe. My gaydar should be way, way sturdier than your friends from Tennessee And I don’t believe anyone was surprised at Tracer, come on! It’s not hard to clock her.
Anyway, the father figure thing. I mean… did Blizz really do it? He was adopted as team dad by the fanbase and tbh I’m not even sure why. Is it because he saves a child in his introduction short? Is it because he’s the perfect age to be a parent for 20-something-y-o fans? He never did anything explicitly fatherly before the memes started pouring in and that’s when Blizz caught on and added bits like Tracer calling him “dad” and voicelines, etc. Before that his characterization was just “grumpy military man”. Which, imo, isn’t inherently straight unless you equate hypermasculinity to straightness.
And once again, I agree that he’s “straigh-passing”. But I strongly disagree that it’s evidence for him being intended as straight. He’s not “coded straight”. Gay men like him exist, lots of them. And I still stand by my point that this “coding” is directly related to expression and mannerisms. If not - then what?
I asked one dude what would make Soldier 76 gay coded. He sent me the following pictures.
h ttps://www.deviantart.com/leksotiger/art/Soldier-76-760518243
h ttps://www.deviantart.com/redchetgreen/art/soldier-76-617781367
I’m assuming the second one is intended as a joke.
He said if Soldier 76 was attracted to men, he would wear clothing that show off his body shape, because that’s what men are interested in. His shirt and jacket would be more form fitting. Especially on his waist.
You: gay coding isn’t based on stereotypes! It has nothing to do with fashion and expression! I’m not talking about traditional masculinity!
Also you: shows everyone a picture of an undercut and a butt-pose.
You realize that piece of fanart depicts him in a rather stereotypically “gay” way? A little more and it might look like a caricature. Just add an ear-piercing, make him talk with a slight lisp and you got yourself a token gay. I feel like you’re trolling me right now. But apparently I’m Boo Boo the Fool, so I’ll bite.
Yeah, no one would question his gayness if he looked like that. But not every gay character needs to be visibly flamboyant to justify it, it’s what people in this thread have been parroting since January! If that is what fuels your friends’ gaydar, then it’s extremely unreliable and they should work on improving it.
Also,
This man is supposed to be 55+ years old. He has lost everything he’s had, he thought his friends, who were his only apparent family, are dead. It’s heavily implied he’s an alcoholic and a literal hobo.
Do you and your friend really think that dressing fashionably, getting fancy haircuts and showing off his waist is high oh his priority list?
He dresses and behaves like a soldier, and specifically doesn’t reciprocate any of Ana’s “you’re looking pretty good” quotes like Reinhardt does. Maybe the majority of fps soldier protagonists are straight, but even that’s not a large part of their character. You associating the two outlines the problem in obscenically bold text.
As for justice… I’ll leave you with an exchange from Hamilton, because I really don’t think I’m getting through to you:
“The Constitution’s a mess!” “So it needs ammendments…” “It’s full of contradictions!” “So is independence! We HAVE to start somewhere!”
We fought hard to get as far as we have, in terms of LGBTQ representation. So why are we waiting for the rest of the world to catch up?
And I don’t believe anyone was surprised at Tracer, come on! It’s not hard to clock her.