Slyjinks

Gonna have a little rant here, but I’ve been thinking about the arguments I’ve been seeing over “playersexual” characters again, and it’s just…

Okay, here’s the thing. I agree that “playersexual” does not count as “real” representation (unless other things are done in the game to establish that the character is unquestionably bi/pan. Preston Garvey? Not representation. John Hancock? Abso-fucking-lutely).

That said, I don’t see that there’s anything wrong with having playersexual characters. It’s not “real” rep, it doesn’t give the devs any kind of bragging rights, but…

…Okay, look. Those types of games have always at some level been power fantasies. In ye-olden-days they mostly focused on being power fantasies for straight cis dudes, but why is it that now that this bi-gal is getting her some power fantasy in gaming, people are going to go all-in about how “Oh, they’re doing queer wrong?”

Like, everyone wants to go on about how ground-breaking New Vegas is because you’re only allowed that one flirt line with Arcade if you’re a male character with a specific feat, and meanwhile I’m hung up on the fact that I can’t play that game as a character that matches my own gender without putting up with casual street harassment from the fucking Kings.

I’m not saying Obsidian should have made that line available to Arcade or anything (although I am kind of bothered by the female prostitute that calls girl/girl sex “kinky shit” or whatever), it’s not like any of the New Vegas characters are truly romancable anyway.

(Although funny how popular mods like the one that turns Benny bi can be with that same crowd…)

I’m just saying… sure, characters with “set” sexualities are good, too, but why you gotta come down on “playersexual” just for being a mechanic in a game?