If you have ever attempted to change your name you know it is way more annoying to change your name than accept someone else’s change of name. The amount of admin it takes to make that update in your social circle even before you try and make it legal is a test of social fortitude and willpower.

Remember when someone is changing their name they are very aware of the imposition of the mental load they are placing on you. Grace goes a long way.

I imagine the closest we are gunna get modern wise is Ostrich meat which tastes like the midway point between chicken and beef.

The person who is ridiculed because they are different, disowned from their families because they can’t meet the demands of pretending to be someone they are not, denied the social accommodation that makes their lives comfortable, refused housing because of how they look, denied the health care that helps them feel centered because it creeps out the people who do not have their condition… How can their mind be still?

Trans health is dependent on the people around us the same way your health is dependent on the people around you. Trans joy is as possible as trans suffering. The difference is in other people allowing it to happen.

And transgender ideology? What is that? To be nice to transgender people?

If I were to frame it in terms of an ideology - that we should be allowed to pursue happiness and comfort aided by the backing of scientific evidence to ensure we are safe. That our lives not be rendered into terms where reproductive function or lack thereof dictates how we must live our lives.

And that while we do not demand full metaphysical submission of belief of other people that we are our gender it should be acknowledged that our social engineering mechanisms are a kindness that allow us greater room to psychologicaly function. These absences of accommodation in professional situations or public design causes either our livelihoods or accessibility to spaces or facets of society to become hardships above and beyond the average citizen.

I personally do not care if someone is “nice” to me or not. I care about being able to leave their vacinity if they are being an ass and that my safety and job security isn’t effected by me being trans.

Oh Gods I hope this isn’t the case. The right would start foaming at the mouth and could start rounding us up as threats.

It’s also… a little ghoulish to speak about a kid losing their parent that way. Whatever you think of the man his kid’s grief isn’t exactly something to celebrate. I get not mourning the man but celebrating his death isn’t going to help us trans folks in the end. I have a feeling that this is going to get a whole lot worse for all of us as a people very quickly and as a whole we’re already a group hanging on by our fingertips.

Because I don’t find you terribly sympathetic. Yes, I would like better inclusion and more variety in games and can look at past examples and point out what worked and what didn’t from a queer perspective but you came in hot with your nose out of joint about how what is being asked is bad “for everyone” as though you are the arbitor of the everyman.

It’s worthless to conceed ground over and over again to people who always wanted us to disappear. It doesn’t work. You want to go on the woke advisory board on Steam and see how nit picky they get? This isn’t about media. This is part of an interconnected effort to get all of us to disappear from public life forever and it didn’t start, it never stopped and the point is it won’t until it all goes back to the way it used to be.

What is “in it” for the non-queer gamers is realizing they aren’t the center of the fucking universe. That they can show their support for something that isn’t explicitly for them and leave homophobic assholes with no wonderful jungle of slightly less homophobic assholes to hide behind. But no the second it costs you anything suddenly it’s the end of the fucking world. People want to feel all nice and accepting and open minded but they never want it to actually inconvenience them.

By all means keep on harping your one fucking studio you hate. I hope it keeps you warm.

Was it worth it? Coming down hard on queer and telling us we’re terrible people for daring tp ask for something better and throwing your lot in with the oppressors at the smallest hurdle?

Are these “bad things in the name of inclusion” just making a game you don’t like? The push against “inclusion” on a general scale has lead to real world harms because a bunch of babies can’t come to terms with there being pieces of media with choices they don’t like and threw a fucking tantrum. There isn’t really a side anymore where railing against the harms of “inclusion” isn’t propping up the arguement that minorities “earned” the actions against them by asking “too much”.

People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games. The anti-DEI crowd is the Conservative crowd and you might be on the fringe but you aren’t outside the radius.

There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people" - that’s just different degrees of homophobia.

Games changed a bit so that they aren’t all made for you specifically. Those franchises didn’t belong to you and for some people those ‘ruined games’ are their favorite games. Everyone has studios they don’t like. Not all representation is gunna be great because not all writing is going to be great but when inclusion “ruins it for everyone” in your veiw look around and ask if the people around you who are discussing it is actually a good cross section of “everyone”.

Ah yes, the two sexualities - political and non-political. You really aren’t as far along as you think.

I can accept that you are unhappy and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable. Gods forbid they ever be like every other form of media and actually have a message they want to convey or try anything new. I can say having something tailored specifically for you is quite nice - now that more of us actually get to experience that.

By making the player make the first move, they empower the player to choose.

The problem often becomes that the entire sexuallity of mechanically bi characters or all characters in the game are often under player control. In a some circumstances games with this mechanism will have the characters who are not chosen as romantic options pair with no one ever or defer to straight behaviour. This is in deference to games wanting to have it’s cake and eat it too.

Examples of this in action :

Stardew Valley where if you don’t choose a same sex option to romance - no other characters ever have any romances ever. The one exception is Leah who has an ex who shows up late in the romance pursuit who tries to win her back. However, the ex is whatever gender the PC is so if it’s a hetero relationship, it still appears to be a hetero relationship.

Harvest Moon Mineral Town (later editions) give the player to options to romance same sex options… But everyone you don’t choose pairs up in hetero relationships and no other characters.

In both games there is no other queer rep so the player essentially opts in or out to all queer representation in the game. Blanket Heterosexuallity or bi-invisibility until given player approval is the default.

Indy games are generally the leaders for actual queer rep that isn’t optional to the game’s plot where characters sexuallities are not revealed by the player opt in.

Hey, just a heads up assuming “gender politics” don’t matter and being upset if a character is noticeably queer - makes you a part of the homophobic conservative circles. People, irl are queer, omitting queer people from settings where they would just exist as part of the world because “they shouldn’t be there” is a little queerphobic.

Conservative circles have been screaming about woke games forever just when options to have non-binary people exist at character creation or when there is one gay side character. A lot of folks in the arts, including in game development, are queer and like to make stories that didn’t exist when they were growing up. Your opinion is your own but assuming it’s universally considered “good game design” to force developers to exclude the things they are passionate to put in their games to appease a howling mob that is never happy even when they get what they say they want is a bit rich.

What you are describing is a concept of the mechanically bisexual. The options as given often allow players to choose in a sandbox game whether they experience the game as a completely non-queer experience or not. It sometimes creates queerness as an option rather than a core part of an experience which rep wise is considered a step better than when all romance options in games were mandatorily heterosexual but also kind of a cop out where player choice means all characters are often Shrodinger’s bi. If you want to experience say Skyrim as an almost entirely queer free experience - you can. Your choices flip that representation on and off like a lightswitch so if you have queerphobic tendencies the game doth not offend much. No one ever hits on you first.

Rep wise Gay characters are ones specifically ones where the queerness isn’t optional, it’s a part of the canon of the character. Straight characters often are so in fixed story narratives where they have hetero relationships and if they have brushes that look like same sex romance it’s played for laughs and treated as not really an option. Since culture still sort of assumes straightness as a default if the character only ever is coded romantically by the frame of the game to be attracted to the opposite sex they can be termed a “straight character” because as a player the game’s interfacing with that character’s sexuality is mandatory. An example is the Prince of Persia games or the Final Fantasy series which have a romantically coded opposite sex paramours that you don’t have an option not to interface with the character’s sexuallity.

This is way more common in older games and fixed story franchises.

If you are unhappy here I assure you there are others to choose from. However I have no particular desire to delve on someone else’s behalf particularly since when so many say “freedom of speech” the term so often boils down to just wanting to say slurs or phobic commentary. Either this place is good enough to use with the design of etiquette the people who came before you set or it’s worth accepting the inconvenience of moving on and finding something better on your own.

I wish you luck in your hunt.

See I don’t think the “tribe” is the trouble when one is given the option and space to choose or abandon their tribes freely with no cost. If this particular culture isn’t your jam there’s plenty of others that do similar that might be to your taste.

Applying the trauma of racism, religious persecution and so on to a digital place that is one of many… Doesn’t feel genuine. I have a lot of feelings about places becoming toxic through allowing racist/phobic stuff to thrive but it’s not like the people booted from spaces who hold those views are shut out in the absolute cold. There are spaces where their veiws and comfort is centered it just doesn’t nessisarily overlap with where I am.

Saying we must accept absolutely everything because “tribes are bad” seems to apply some axiomatic principle to the lowest of low stakes social clubs. The Internet is a string of endless bars next to each other, if you don’t like what one place is serving there’s another one down the road.

On the topic of echo chambers - At what point did we decide that a bunch of people over a wide geographical area with similar interests and a common code of standards/preferences of civility… Is a bad thing?

It’s kind of how social clubs exist irl.

Eh, I have seen enough of what happens to places that favour so called “freedom of speech” or no moderation over valuing comfort of vulnerable users. There’s plenty of places that exist that have “freedom of speech”. Rather than making this place just like those places why not just go to a pre-existing one or start your own?

This is a very America centric veiw and even if it is a steel man it deserves a counterpoint.

After WWII most of the nations who were old empire builders were decimated. The general feeling was even those on the winning side didn’t feel like they’d won. The rebuilding was slow and economic austerity lasted for decades.

The American prosperity of the 1950’s and 60’s wasn’t “normal”. America didn’t have international competition it otherwise would have and that power gave them bargaining rights which made them both culturally dominant as they projected a sense of prosperity and politically powerful due to the resources at their disposal. Opposition to America was potentially disastrous and America threw their weight around like crazy. They expanded their military with these resources and established bases in countries too weak to oppose them.

America came out of the war with something of a Big Damn Hero complex. Communism, for all it’s perceived threat was also a handy excuse to pursue expansion and in keeping American supremacy in place. Whether countries wantes to be “protected” or not really has a lot of across the board nuance. A lot of American political will was coercive and a lot of the things done in the fight for “democracy” were disproportionate and horrific.

Really a lot of the American supremacy at bottom was might makes right. With the world finally recovering economically and now able to speak as equals the US is using measures that demand a return to that economic supremacy and stranglehold. The larger sore points are growing. The world doesn’t need one big power in charge. They don’t need a king with a standing army. They want to make their own choices and have freedoms to not conform to whatever America wants and the attitudes Americans show to disregard that will is garnering response.

Statement wise “I don’t want the government to tell me what to eat” or variations could mean basically anything. Most of the time it’s posturing on behalf of the idea that a lack of government regulation is a good thing which ignores a rather bloody history of food suppliers adulterating food with harmful substances in the name of preservation / cheapening production cost or using production practices that cause the likelihood of contamination of food.

Once you scratch the surface of the argument you can usually figure out more exactly what they mean and it often isn’t things like government subsidy programs publishing food pyramids based on shady science and economics rather than in the interest of health.

Often it’s based out of perceived personal inconvenience or the appearance of moral judgement such as when there’s some sort of health labelling initiative.

In Canada there are a lot of things that are not considered legal additives for food that are used in the US and the difference in strictness is in part because the Health care system in Canada is funded publicly. Producers of foodstuffs cost the government money directly if whatever they put in it has no nutritional value and causes known health problems. Rather than let companies create messes and tragedies which the government is on the hook to clean up when people’s health fails they remove the issue at it’s source. In the US there’s less incentive as these costs become scattered in the form of individual medical bills and oftentimes the savings are from food being shelf stable for longer. Shrugging one’s shoulders at the fallout or claiming its an exercise of “freedom” is in service to those who make money hand over fist.

Hey, Non-binary trans masc person in trades here.

I can tell you how I perceive different types of co-worker if it helps you want to dial in what it’s like on the other side of the experience. There’s layers to the whole situation and as non-binary folks we understand what we are asking for isn’t automatically going to click and requires people to figure us out.

First up : Most of us end of day aren’t going to rock the boat for anything less than fully agregious behaviour so calls to report other people for being mildly offensive are probably not actually going to go anywhere. Most of us are scared of being labelled “a problem” so we just take the hits when they come. If you are a boss and notice a non-binary person sticking closer to specific people and avoiding others there’s a good chance that they’ve found the people who are safe and avoiding ones who aren’t. A great accommodation that can invisibly help is just to recognize this strata and if a task nessesitates putting people together try and pair along these lines. A lot of co-workers wait until other people aren’t around to let their nastier behaviour shine.

Now to co-worker types. Aside from the full on transphobe or problem persons there’s a range of different stages of cool people.

The “I don’t really get it” Co-worker pays lip service to the polite aspects of using pronouns. They are the type to introduce you to others by misgendering you and then flap their hands and go “Oh no sorry ‘they’”. We know they don’t get it or don’t really care. The misgendering still hurts but they are fairly benign. They make these accidents non maliciously and are afforded grace. If they step in it we basically disregard because they aren’t really worth the effort of getting too comfortable around. We make these accommodations for strangers daily. Annoying but nessisary.

The “in training” co-worker is one whom is encountering their very first trans person. They want you to be their Obi wan and their enthusiasm is a bit of a double edged sword at times. It’s tiring to teach people to dance when they keep stepping on your feet but the job needs doing. Some of us veiw this as our own brand of service to the cause of normalizing ourselves more widely. Some of us just don’t want to be bothered. Either way, just wanting to learn is heaps better than ambivalence. If you fuck up something, don’t make a big deal about it. It’s not that you’re a terrible person and should have known better. Our stuff takes practice and we know it’s not intuitive.

The “A little too up in our shit” co-worker is excited to know the real you but looks at you as a beautiful creature in need of preservation. They might seek to advocate on your behalf or behind your back but the attempt is clumsy and often at odds with a non-binary person’s desire to just get through the workday as a regular human and not make waves. Good enthusiasm sure, we’re probably friends but for the love of God we’re adults and we can sort out our own shit if need be.

The “Understands the Assignment” co-worker is just comfortable to be around. They don’t have to be the most tuned in to all the nuance about our specific needs in ways we require more out of partners, family and friends but they treat our basic requirements as no big deal, maybe they occasionally ask questions to check in if they catch us struggling or reacting but aren’t going to narc to the boss on our behalf. They either avoid all stereotypes associated with sex or in the case of trans mascs/trans femmes they treat us like one of the boys/girls. Gold standard.