MacDonagh (User)

  • Contributor
  • 5 bubbles
  • 6 in CRank
  • Score: 22540
"HAHA, Public enemy of butthurt fannies. "

A Viewpoint on GaymerCon

MacDonagh | 715d ago
User blog

It doesn't take much to stir the hornet's nest does it? Gamers claim to be a welcoming group of people but as the comment section of the recent "A Gay Gamer Convention is NOT Necessary (Gaymercon 2013)" article has shown there is a sizable portion of gamers who were insulted by the very idea of a gaygamer convention more than anything else because it allegedly promotes segregation and they should just go to the other "normal" conventions like ComicCon etc. At first; I was rather blase about the subject at hand because I have had no desire to go to a convention of any sort whatsoever. It's not that I hate people, but I feel a lot better when I'm not around them.

I post my comment saying that they were well within their rights to have a "Gaymercon" or whatever it was since there has been other groups of people who have used conventions to talk and express different viewpoints such as Star Trek fans, anime fans/otakus/cosplayers, furries, My Little Pony fanboys, and a whole other host of various fan-based conventions. Little did I know that people would get so worked up over the mere concept of a convention that primarily appeals to gay gamers would cause such an uproar.

When I returned from work, I trawled through the posts that were increasing at a rapid rate which had an underpinning theme. That gay gamers or "gaymers" if you will, wished to be separate from the mainstream gamer community and that they should just go to those "normal" conferences if they want to meet people with the same interests. The comments then started to escalate to the point where people were openly wondering if any sort of deviant behavior would take place at such an event, claiming it'd be a prime pick-up spot for "gaymers". I honestly don't understand why people are gossiping like elderly fishwives over gamers who happen to be homosexual, but whatever. As I scrolled down through the increasingly vitriolic responses to the very idea of a gathering of gay gamers, a saddening realization struck me on where the medium is right now.

Some people were claiming that this would cause a divide in the gaming community because gay people are trying to form an alternative community of gay gamers, but doesn't this divide already exist? The amount of homophobia that is spewed on competitive multiplayer, as well as the acrid racism certainly shows what a wonderfully inclusive community we are. Oh sure you can argue they can always mute them or block them, but then again; surely you can see the point of a group of like-minded individuals sharing a forum where they can freely express their ideas, their frustrations, their points of view across to others? Isn't that what conventions are supposed to do?

Indeed, I'd like to tackle some of the core arguments that is against this gaymer conference, as some are deliberately obtuse.

1. What's the point of this convention? We're all gamers! Stop trying to segregate!

What's the point of any convention? To foster a community and to exchange ideas and in this case; gay gamers and LGBT issues in gaming. In terms of segregation; Sci-Fi shows like Star Trek or Star Wars have their own unique conventions as well as numerous Sci-Fi conventions as well. They aren't segregating but only wish to provide an environment where fans can talk freely and exchange their ideas that is perhaps not provided by the various other conventions.

2. For people who are demanding equal rights; they sure try their best to be different.

Maybe they are just being themselves and would like an environment where they can do that without any awkward stares? Perish the thought.

3. They are so trying to go there and get hook-ups! LOLZ

Just like any other convention I suppose. I would wonder how much deviant behaviour goes on in conventions like Blizzcon or Comicon or E3 but then I realise that I don't give a damn about frivolous distractions.

4. Gay exclusive event?! Why don't we have a STRAIGHT exclusive event?

E3, GamerCon, ComicCon, and all the others can be considered "straight" if that's what you really want. You can also attend the Gaymer thing without fear of being turned away simply because you're straight but you won't. We all know why.

I could go on but I feel I've made my point aptly. As gamers, we tend to be attracted to spurious articles that do not warrant the attention it garners. One would've hoped that we have moved onto a point were people can be who they are without molestation or abuse from the ignorant or the bigoted. Be it race, sexuality, disability or whatever feature that makes you stick out from the crowd. Unfortunately, we do not live in those times yet and acceptance can only happen when people start being logical and can learn to tolerate another person's point of view without the need to belittle or marginalize a minority because we simply don't agree with them.

Put it this way. If My Little Pony can get a "BronyCon" why can't a gay gamer have a "GaymerCon"? I've also embedded a video and I wonder if there are many people on here who share similar sentiments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eg3N3TayP8

Captain Tuttle  +   714d ago
Good blog
People are too uptight
Hicken  +   714d ago
Agreed. I don't see a problem with it. In fact, I see it as being necessary, until such time as the gaming community- and society, as a whole- ca stop looking at gay individuals as being anything other than a person who happens to be gay.

Unfortunately, that's not likely to happen any time soon.
coolbeans  +   713d ago
Regardless of your stance, it's interesting to see both sides of the coin back to back in this blog and DragonKnight's released a few hours earlier.
cgoodno  +   713d ago
And that it DragonKnight's was approved first, though submitted later, I think shows that more people agree with his/her viewpoint. I'm not sure if that's a sign of progress or not, but I'll ignorantly choose to think the former.

It is an interesting topic. I also think it's still a very touchy subject for people to handle as well, even if they are perfectly fine with the idea and just don't think it is a good one. I look at some of my thoughts and think that some think I'm calling them homophobes when I'm only talking about the subject at hand and debating their viewpoint.
coolbeans  +   713d ago
I have to correct you on the timeline.
I was actually on pending at the perfect moment for DragonKnight's to appear. I think I approved within...15-ish mins of when it was submitted. It wasn't until after I finished reading Dragon's and went back to pending and saw another one pop up: this blog.

I'm 99.9% sure the time difference is that Dragon copy/pasta'd his work directly from a MS Word document while Mac produced it under 'creating' and maybe came back to it here and there.
#2.1.1 (Edited 713d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
cgoodno  +   713d ago
You might be right. I could be wrong.

Don't tell anyone.
MacDonagh  +   713d ago
OK. There is a reason why I took a little longer to submit my blog for approval. I wanted to gather my thoughts on the subject and began to look over that contentious article which caused such an uproar. Thankfully, I wrote out all the of the comments I found disheartening before they were considered "bad language" or "offensive" and re-read them to try and get my head around that sort of thinking. I wrote out quite a bit and was almost finished with writing it until I found an MST3K film on youtube. So I watched it and fell asleep halfway through the film.

After I was up and running; I noticed Dragon's article and I read through it. While I didn't agree with his stance on the Gaymer matter; I approved it because I did find that he had an interesting viewpoint to share.

I was also intrigued on what kind of responses it would gather, considering that my own blog post took a rather different position to his, I felt it'd be important to see what responses both sides of the argument would attract. Sorry for the confusion.
#2.1.3 (Edited 713d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
cgoodno  +   713d ago
No need to explain yourself, MacDonagh. None at all.

Thank you for sharing your view point on the subject!

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember