Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

[Christopher]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Or to turn the question around: What would it harm to include more? If someone doesn't use romantic' date=' relationship or sexuality in their games they can continue not to do so but some folks might be find it a welcome change.[/quote']

Perhaps this:

This is a non-issue in my campaign because my players are between 10 and 15 years old and have never expressed the slightest interest in exploring any sort of romantic relationships with their characters. And to be brutally honest' date=' I'm glad for it. Not because of any homophobia, but because I'm their dad and it would be awkward.[/quote']

As soon as it is about sex, people get Flunky:

From here:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HotCoffeeMiniGame about the Troper Namer GTA:

Also, appreciate the Irony: after all the various illegal activities one can do and as much Video Game Cruelty Potential exists in the series, a perfectly legal and consentual heterosexual encounter is what raised the most controversy.

 

 

I think his point was that this is only an issue for someone if that someone insists on making it an issue' date=' and if someone chooses to not make it an issue never bringing it up, that's just as valid a choice.[/quote']

This is what I try to tell them from the beginning.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

I think his point was that this is only an issue for someone if that someone insists on making it an issue' date=' and if someone chooses to not make it an issue never bringing it up, that's just as valid a choice.[/quote']

 

The thread has branched off into some different directions so les makes ure we''re talking about the same thing. Which topic: Relationships at all, the low number of characters representing other sexualities present in the Champions Universe or something else?

 

If the first then yes, I agree completely its up to indvidiual groups and players to decide how and if they want to handle that topic and what's appropriate for their playstyle. If the second, well, I can't agree there. It is a issue even if someone wants to ignore it or it doesn't effect their particular game. It does matter to other people. I'm not saying and I don't think anyone else is that indvidiual GMs have to do anything but that it would be considerate for DOJ to think about that portion of their fanbase in their work. The individual consumer is perfectly free to use or not use the ideas presented just like any other. No one is trying to force you to include subject matter in your game that you don't want (general you, btw).

[Big Monkey]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

The thread has branched off into some different directions so les makes ure we''re talking about the same thing. Which topic: Relationships at all' date=' the low number of characters representing other sexualities present in the Champions Universe or something else?[/quote']

 

I think "all of the above" is an appropriate answer here.

 

 

 

If the first then yes, I agree completely its up to indvidiual groups and players to decide how and if they want to handle that topic and what's appropriate for their playstyle. If the second, well, I can't agree there. It is a issue even if someone wants to ignore it or it doesn't effect their particular game. It does matter to other people. I'm not saying and I don't think anyone else is that indvidiual GMs have to do anything but that it would be considerate for DOJ to think about that portion of their fanbase in their work. The individual consumer is perfectly free to use or not use the ideas presented just like any other. No one is trying to force you to include subject matter in your game that you don't want (general you, btw).

 

Emphasis added. On the basis of the emphasized sentence, I have to ask: if what you say is true in that sentence, then what is the big deal? If you (generic you), as a homosexual, feel you (generic group of you) are under-represented, then by all means increase the population of homosexuals in your individual campaign. This is a superhero game, not a "real life simulation", and the subject of sex, personal relationships, and sexual orientation, while important in real life, are utterly and completely secondary to the main thrust of pretty much all superhero stories, and that is: the good guys do good things, stop the bad guys, and save the world.

 

Are personal relationships, sex, and all related subjects important? Yes, in the real world. In the world of superheroics, they just aren't. And thus, with absolutely no prejudicial feeling on my part, I can say with quite the straight face that demanding DoJ cater to your (generic your) own minority group is wrong. You won't ever see me campaigning for them to include more characters who are left-handed overweight balding single-fathers, for example, because doing so would be intrusive on my part.

 

I see where you are coming from. I understand your concern. I just disagree with your suggested action. If you feel X-minority group is underrepresented, then do your personal campaign a favor and use more X-minorities in your campaign. I, who do not feel the need because of exigent circumstances, will do otherwise.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

With respect, I don't think it's about catering to the concerns of a "minority group", so much as it is being market-savvy and market-sensitive. If your customers express concern about underrepresentation and/or would like to see more diverse representation among characters in sourcebooks, be it in terms of ethnicity, gender, orientation, social life, religion, etc., it's not a bad idea--from a marketing standpoint--to throw them a bone here and there. It may grow the audience and increase product sales. I doubt it's going to decrease sales to have one or two additional NPCs be GLBTQ in a sourcebook. Ditto for female characters and various ethnicities and religious affiliations. It just makes the comic book world look a little bit more like the real world(where white males are a minority of the population).

[Clonus]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Are personal relationships, sex, and all related subjects important? Yes, in the real world. In the world of superheroics, they just aren't.

 

Who are Lois Lane, Gwen Stacy and Steve Trevor?

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Edit: What Megaplayboy said except to add that I think it's just considerate in addition to good marketing.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Perhaps this:

 

As soon as it is about sex, people get Flunky:

 

People become mooks when it comes to sex? I guess if you're into that sort of thing...

 

Seriously, including a few more gay npcs in the sourcebooks isn't going to make things more sexual.

 

Glimmer, when not adventuring, shares a lavish penthouse apartment with her boyfriend, Trevor.

 

is not more "about sex"

 

Utra, when not adventuriing, shares a lavish penthouse apartment with his boyfriend, Trevor.

 

No one is demanding any kind of 'special' emphasis. Just treat it like heterosexuality is treated, a background detai and occcasional plothook.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

I'm just popping in to say how much I appreciate Phoenix240 for fighting the good fight here.

 

Inclusiveness is good. The Champions Universe is a campaign setting with lots of people in it. Making them representative of the diversity of people who live in the world is good. Steve has actually done a pretty good job of that, and I hope that he continues to do so.

[Big Monkey]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Who are Lois Lane' date=' Gwen Stacy and Steve Trevor?[/quote']

 

Actually? Plot devices, for most of their existences. Living MacGuffins that only existed to get the heroes interested.

 

 

No one is demanding any kind of 'special' emphasis. Just treat it like heterosexuality is treated, a background detai and occcasional plothook.

 

Sure, excellent. But now we're back to "you're free to do what you want in your own campaign".

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Sure, excellent. But now we're back to "you're free to do what you want in your own campaign".

 

Okay, I can see this conversation isn't really going to go anywhere.

[Greywind]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Why would it, really? If you feel it is such a major concern that needs to be addressed why not send a PM to Steve or Darren?

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Why would it' date=' really? If you feel it is such a major concern that needs to be addressed why not send a PM to Steve or Darren?[/quote']

 

 

I started this thread because I was curious how/if people were using GLBT in their own campaign and how many were in Champions not as campaign to be elected Most Social Aware Hero boards member. I honestly thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss and would be more civil (and hopefully a little more open minded) than in other places.

 

I'm just not getting where the seeming hostility and over defensiveness towards the idea is coming from. If you don't use relationship subplots you still won't. Some other people might feel better and happier with Champions Universe that it acknowledges them as customers and people not some kind of dirty little secret that people can handle "if they want to deal with that sort of thing". Maybe they'll tell their friends and at least earn the setting some props and possibly new customers. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

 

I really don't care if your group role plays characters beyond fight scenes and to what degree they do it. Really, I couldn't care less. I do care that there is a segment of the market, the fanbase that is being ignored and put off. Women and other minorities used to get it just as bad and that’s improved quite a it my opinion (not "perfect" but nothing is). And I don't see how it hurts anything to try and be inclusive to another group. We're all gamers here and people like to see characters that they can identify with, that are something like them. Who is going to be hurt by that? I don't think anyone wants to go back to the days where you only saw black and other ethnicities as the occasional stereotype sidekick or women there to serve coffee or get in trouble.

 

 

And I don't think DOJ or Steve Long is being homophobic. Just something they might not have considered. When most people think comic book fan, they think white heterosexual male. But that doesn’t mean, IMO, that no one else should get into consideration or other aspects of the market shouldn't be considered. Its actually less touchy than material already in the game and no one wants the All Homosexual book o' villains or anything goofy like that.

[Greywind]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Torches and pitchforks.

[Cygnia]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

What are the downsides?

 

Like with any character, the fear of being turned into a one-dimensional stereotype defined by only a certain character trait (this time sexuality). Is inclusiveness helped or hindered if the character is written as a blatant token or the negative misconceptions of a trait are only emphasized? As an example, you were intrigued by the idea of the Vandaleurs being gay, but there are others in the LBQGT community who wouldn't be happy that a couple of gay villains (rather than villains who just happen to be gay) are also played off as incestuous sexual deviants.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Like with any character' date=' the fear of being turned into a one-dimensional stereotype defined by only a certain character trait (this time sexuality). Is inclusiveness helped or hindered if the character is written as a blatant token or the negative misconceptions of a trait are only emphasized? As an example, you were intrigued by the idea of the Vandaleurs being gay, but there are others in the LBQGT community who wouldn't be happy that a couple of gay villains (rather than villains who just happen to be gay) are also played off as incestuous sexual deviants.[/quote']

 

I was more amazed by the fact they were openly incestuous than possibly gay. But yeah, I can see that fear but I have some faith that the writers in DOJ's employ can do better than that.I think that also stems from their being so few other examples. If the only characters of a certain type you see are "bad examples" then its going stand out even more.

 

Thats why I'd like to see homosexuality handled just like heterosexuality. An aspect of the character that comes up when it has too. Like in my earlier example post with Glimmer and Utron. Some of the alternate sexualities that currently exist in the setting are good examples. Their orientation is a part of them. I don't feel there should be a some sort of quota like every source book must contain X numbers of black characters, y number of women or z number homosexuals but writers should be a little conscious of their choices and try to make some compelling characters that different folks can identify with.

[Big Monkey]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

I started this thread because I was curious how/if people were using GLBT in their own campaign and how many were in Champions not as campaign to be elected Most Social Aware Hero boards member. I honestly thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss and would be more civil (and hopefully a little more open minded) than in other places.

 

I'm just not getting where the seeming hostility and over defensiveness towards the idea is coming from.

 

At the risk of sounding snarky, I think you're getting the "hostility" from thin air. I'm certainly not "hostile" to the idea. I'm just indifferent. I've already stated that my campaign doesn't deal with heterosexuality, much less homosexuality, and so it is a non-issue. Where my confusion lies is in not understanding the motivation to ask for more "inclusiveness" when the issue really is one that is better of, and should be, in my opinion, dealt with and incorporated (or not) at the whim of the GM and players.

 

I'd say the same thing, by the way, to any person who wanted to inject more of Social Cause X into the game's official setting, rather than just do it for themselves in their own campaign, be that Social Cause higher awareness of the homosexual population or Hamster liberation. I'm not trying to be snide, sarcastic, or dismissive... I just see this as something that needs to be dealt with on an individual basis.

 

 

If you don't use relationship subplots you still won't. Some other people might feel better and happier with Champions Universe that it acknowledges them as customers and people not some kind of dirty little secret that people can handle "if they want to deal with that sort of thing". Maybe they'll tell their friends and at least earn the setting some props and possibly new customers. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

The fact that you have interpreted my statements as my thinking this is a "dirty little secret" reinforces my belief that you are seeing hostility where there is none. It implies I have something against homosexuals, and that I want to keep them out of sight, and therefore out of mind. You are, in fact, reading prejudice where there isn't any.

 

 

I really don't care if your group role plays characters beyond fight scenes and to what degree they do it. Really, I couldn't care less. I do care that there is a segment of the market, the fanbase that is being ignored and put off. Women and other minorities used to get it just as bad and that’s improved quite a it my opinion (not "perfect" but nothing is). And I don't see how it hurts anything to try and be inclusive to another group. We're all gamers here and people like to see characters that they can identify with, that are something like them. Who is going to be hurt by that? I don't think anyone wants to go back to the days where you only saw black and other ethnicities as the occasional stereotype sidekick or women there to serve coffee or get in trouble.

 

Trying to be more inclusive doesn't hurt anyone, obviously. But consider the other side of the coin: are you really being hurt by the current level of inclusiveness found in the official Champions setting? I mean, really? Does the fact that there is only five or six gay characters... out of the very few whose sexuality is officially "pinned down" in either way, remember... in the entire setting really "injure" you in any way, shape, or form?

 

I mean, honestly? Are you really hurt by it? Is DoJ? Personally, I don't think so. Hence my opinion.

[Jhaierr]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

At the risk of sounding snarky' date=' I think you're getting the "hostility" from thin air. I'm certainly not "hostile" to the idea. I'm just indifferent. I've already stated that my campaign doesn't deal with [i']heterosexuality[/i], much less homosexuality, and so it is a non-issue. Where my confusion lies is in not understanding the motivation to ask for more "inclusiveness" when the issue really is one that is better of, and should be, in my opinion, dealt with and incorporated (or not) at the whim of the GM and players.

 

I'm not sure if I define "indifferent" in the same way as you do. If one is indifferent, then one would have no problem either way. You stated that "Trying to be more inclusive doesn't hurt anyone, obviously," so what harm will it do to include a few more if there are some people who are saying, "Hey, I don't think we are being inclusive enough"? Doesn't hurt you, doesn't hurt me... so why not?

 

The fact that you have interpreted my statements as my thinking this is a "dirty little secret" reinforces my belief that you are seeing hostility where there is none. It implies I have something against homosexuals, and that I want to keep them out of sight, and therefore out of mind. You are, in fact, reading prejudice where there isn't any.

 

Regardless of your intentions, the result of your position is essentially "Let's not have any visible gay characters in the books, but visible heterosexual characters are fine."

 

Trying to be more inclusive doesn't hurt anyone, obviously. But consider the other side of the coin: are you really being hurt by the current level of inclusiveness found in the official Champions setting? I mean, really? Does the fact that there is only five or six gay characters... out of the very few whose sexuality is officially "pinned down" in either way, remember... in the entire setting really "injure" you in any way, shape, or form?

 

I mean, honestly? Are you really hurt by it? Is DoJ? Personally, I don't think so. Hence my opinion.

 

Heterosexual persons don't have to ever wonder if there will be people of their same orientation on TV shows, in movies, in books, in comics, in RPG settings, etc. They will always be there. This is their privilege. (The same goes for any dominant demographic: white, male, etc.)

 

I almost always include a few GLB characters in my games, so I have the whole "do whatever you want in your own game" covered. But over the last 7-8 years of buying Hero supplements in any genre and reading tons and tons of character write-ups, and having only 2 characters with same-sex relationships[1] now or in the past (and one of those is only mentioned in other characters' writeups), one begins to understand that in the Hero universe, there are virtually no gay heroes (or gay characters) of any importance.

 

So when you ask someone if they are "hurt" by a lack of inclusion, this is a Catch-22. No, I am not physically hurt. I live my life normally regardless of whether there are GLB characters in Hero books. It doesn't affect me like that. However, what sort of feeling should I have when people like me are relegated to the "invisible" category or the "handle it on your own" category, over and over again, throughout every supplement? So if I say that I am "hurt" by it, then I am being overly sensitive in many people's eyes. So my answer to you is to ask yourself that question -- why would this be important to someone?

 

I hope that clears up some of your confusion.

 

 

[1] I'm not counting the Vandaleur twins. Incestuous narcissism brought about by a failed attempt to enter the mystical realm of Bria plus a mixup by the book's artist does not a real gay hero make.

[David Blue]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Also' date=' do alternate sexualities come up much in your supers games? Are any of the major characters PC or NPC GBLT?[/quote']

In the game I've been playing in for years, yes. The GM was appropriately cautious about getting into that at first, but since soap opera is a major part of the Teen Champions genre he decided to allow it in very carefully vetted cases, and it's worked out well. Because the atmosphere of the game is intentionally conservative, religious and patriotic, teens with sexual quirks have had something to bounce off, dramatically, meaning that disads play as actual complications with roleplaying potential.

 

The character with the best GBLT story was a body-swapping lesbian. She had a lot of decisions to make. She had to decide whether to come out or stay in the closet, and her decision was to stay in the closet. When one of her teammates guessed her secret anyway, that was a small turning point for them, as keeping her secret consolidated their friendship. When another team-mate, a conservative Christian knew, that was really interesting, because the big challenge turned out not to be "how do we get him not to talk?" but "how do we get her to believe that he will keep confidences in confidence?" She nearly outed herself because of a false certainty that he would tell on her anyway, in other words it turned out the problem of stereotyped preconceptions wasn't his, it was hers. She had a frustrating but ultimately heartwarming relationship with an NPC who was simply too young and troubled to know her own sexuality, and she decided, despite her strong attraction, that it would be better if the relationship remained platonic. She had another little sub-plot running with the team leader's girlfriend being jealous of her, not realizing that the reason he was spending time with her was to help her with various things, including covering up her life as a lesbian. She finally got a good "hot" relationship going, and she had to find it in herself to forgive a male friend who unintentionally loused it up. Ultimately she did get outed, but not by any of the guys she'd been worried about; rather the conservative Christian's girlfriend turned out to be a well-connected and volatile bisexual, who angrily outed her in a team meeting, in front of the priest and boss NPC, thus also shredding the credibility of the guys who'd been covering for her / hiding the truth from the authorities. In a team that has had a lot of low points for harmony, that was one of the bad ones. But more confusion was to come, as our lesbian heroine, after being starved for good options, suddenly had two new (PC) team-mates, one a shape-shifting boy permanently stuck with a hot girl as his default form, and the other a hot girl who was acting ambiguously gay but also hostile to the lesbian body-swapper's old stumbling but loyal male friends. That led to a team split, with the girls (including the boy/girl) against the guys (plus the team-leader's slavish, jealous and fanatically loyal girlfriend).

 

Given that we actually wanted a lot of soap opera in this game, I've gotta say: gay got the job done.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

At the risk of sounding snarky, I think you're getting the "hostility" from thin air. I'm certainly not "hostile" to the idea.

 

Well, there are more people than you and me involved in the discussion. The post you quoted was not even in response to a post of yours or mention you specifically.

 

I'm just indifferent. I've already stated that my campaign doesn't deal with heterosexuality, much less homosexuality, and so it is a non-issue. Where my confusion lies is in not understanding the motivation to ask for more "inclusiveness" when the issue really is one that is better of, and should be, in my opinion, dealt with and incorporated (or not) at the whim of the GM and players.

 

I'd say the same thing, by the way, to any person who wanted to inject more of Social Cause X into the game's official setting, rather than just do it for themselves in their own campaign, be that Social Cause higher awareness of the homosexual population or Hamster liberation. I'm not trying to be snide, sarcastic, or dismissive... I just see this as something that needs to be dealt with on an individual basis.

 

The fact that you have interpreted my statements as my thinking this is a "dirty little secret" reinforces my belief that you are seeing hostility where there is none.

 

Again, where are you getting that I've interpreted "your statements"? My post was not directed specifically at you or the "indifferent"

 

 

It implies I have something against homosexuals, and that I want to keep them out of sight, and therefore out of mind. You are, in fact, reading prejudice where there isn't any.

Trying to be more inclusive doesn't hurt anyone, obviously. But consider the other side of the coin: are you really being hurt by the current level of inclusiveness found in the official Champions setting? I mean, really? Does the fact that there is only five or six gay characters... out of the very few whose sexuality is officially "pinned down" in either way, remember... in the entire setting really "injure" you in any way, shape, or form?

 

 

I mean, honestly? Are you really hurt by it? Is DoJ? Personally, I don't think so. Hence my opinion.

 

 

 

 

Where did I ever claim to be hurt by it? I can understand and empathize how others are and feel that it would be simple issue to address, probably good for DOJ's rep and a general positive step for gaming over all. I can relate to problems even if they don't personally effect me. You can think that something could stand some improvement without it being a personal issue for you.

 

But I've said that before.

 

Is DOJ hurt by it? Aside from some possible lost costumers that move to other settings and systems that do make them feel more comfortable? Probably not. Could they be improved by it and with minimal cost and effort? I think so, yes. Would it be a progressive step for the hobby too? Yes, IMO.

 

Edit: On second thought never mind.

[David Blue]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

I think Champions shouldn't go gay, or all affirmative action in any way. I don't think it should aspire to be more "alternative" than it already is and always has been. And I'm not indifferent to the proposed change, I'm opposed.

 

In my experience it's tight, tight character control that makes "alternative sexuality" (AKA teh gay) productive. You need exactly the right character for your game. Preferably exactly the right player character, with the right player, and then you build your NPCs around that. The point is, this stuff is going to be useful, if at all, for the soap opera, and the way the soap opera works is going to be very specific to your game.

 

I don't think file-off-the-serial-numbers-gay NPCs are going to improve enemies books or anything else. If some gamemaster needs an NPC brick whose origin includes "fisted with a radioactive lubricant" they can make that up themselves. It doesn't belong in HERO merchandise.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Ah, okay...wow...

 

EDIT: Man, are you trying to get the thread closed?

[David Blue]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

It seemed like you were trying to bait Big Monkey, who was being quite nice and discussing thinks in a normal HERO-centric way. You were using that courtesy against him and trying to get inside his clothes and make the discussion about his possible issues. "You're completely indifferent so why argue about it? What's your stake?" These things are not your business.

 

So, OK, if you want straightforward opposition, you can have straightforward opposition. What I said is my real opinion. I don't think HERO should go gay to appease people, whether they go the straight political demand route or use a more insinuating style of argument. I think it would make for lousy products. And over time I think cranking out officially gay characters under pressure to make the numbers, which is what this comes down to, would wind up extremely crude.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

It seemed like you were trying to bait Big Monkey, who was being quite nice and discussing thinks in a normal HERO-centric way. You were using that courtesy against him and trying to get inside his clothes and make the discussion about his possible issues. "You're completely indifferent so why argue about it? What's your stake?" These things are not your business.

 

How is it "baiting him" to asnwer the question he posed to me and ask him the same thing in return? "Why am I concerned if the subject doesn't directly "hurt" me is asking me what my stake is in the argument. And what "courtesty" argument are you talking about and how is his argument "Hero-centric" and thinking it would be good for the company and the hobby not? I didn't bring up his "issues". Hell, I wasn't even even talking to him in the first place. I'm not sure why he assumed a post that didn't refer to him or address anything he felt or specifically said was aimed at him.

[phoenix240]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

So, OK, if you want straightforward opposition, you can have straightforward opposition. What I said is my real opinion. I don't think HERO should go gay to appease people, whether they go the straight political demand route or use a more insinuating style of argument. I think it would make for lousy products. And over time I think cranking out officially gay characters under pressure to make the numbers, which is what this comes down to, would wind up extremely crude.

 

Who's has said anything about Hero "going gay"? No one has suggested there be a "gay quota" or anything even remotely like that. All anyone has suggested is that it would be nice for their to be a few more gay or lesbians characters.

Opposed to the idea or not there's no need to use slurs and try to be as crude and offensive as possible to make whatever point you might have.

[David Blue]

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

 

Suppose we shift the argument. Do you have anything you want to say about how to use gay characters / gayness (which is what "alternative sexuality" boils down to) to generate good soap opera in Champions / Dark Champions / Teen Champions etc?