Activision's Diversity Space tool...

[SinR]

And why do you say that Anduin is straight? Because he found dwarven and draenei women attractive? Pfff, that was Afrasiabi lore. We are in the new era of Danuser lore and he'll 100% retcon Anduin into being gay for Wrathion.

FWIW I'd let Anduin invade my Undercity

- - - Updated - - -

And, on topic...

WHAT the FUCK was ActivisionBlizzard thinking when they released this as a PRESS RELEASE?

Thinking about it, this seems like something that'd come out as some shady as fuck "Yeah, Trust Me" leak from HQ that we all just dismiss as "Nah... ActivisionBlizzard isn't THAT stupid... are they???"

[Sharein]

One of the most cringe things I have ever seen.

Lets rate people based on things such as their skincolour and sexual preferences. Because that is not creepy and not very wrong at all.

I hate this woke nonsense.

[Mehrunes]

People dont realise that this is not wokeness. Actiblizzking is so incompetent that they think they need fucking algorhitms to promote diversity. Whats next on the table, frenology?

That will certainly help their recent attempt at having the DFEH case. And yeah, I wouldn't put phrenology behind them. And I'm not sure "next on the table" is even proper here, because chances are phrenology-like BS already contributes to body type and/or facial features parts and how they interact with race.

Also, putting their motivation being pandering rather than genuine wokeness aside, yeah, I'm not really seeing how pursuing a bunch of checkboxes the algorithm says will result in a more "balanced" character rather than just slapping a single checkbox for a character is any less tokenist.

By your own stats, 1 in 10 people are some brand of gay. Do most movies, tv shows and games not have 10 people?

Yeah, that argument never really pans out. Outside from some cuckoo-land exaggerations that shows are now drowning in gay characters the whole right wing (let's be honest here) railing about gay people being in every show or movie always fails to account for how there's nothing statistically out of the ordinary for there to be a gay character or even a couple in a typical story where there are dozens of characters.

[BeepBoo]

Point isn't to get the highest score possible. It's to get a balanced character.

Still seems stupid by forcing you to bake in things just to get a certain score. It's like being forced to give a DND character a "flaw" by the DM. Not everything needs to have some fatal flaw. Things can be boring and normal. That doesn't make them bad design.

- - - Updated - - -

how there's nothing statistically out of the ordinary for there to be a gay character or even a couple in a typical story where there are dozens of characters.

~3.5% LGBTQ people worldwide pop and .3% trans. Have one or so in every show? Maybe not out of the ordinary. Have them as one of the absolute central plot characters every time? Yeah. That's starting to push it a little bit. Like every group of 3-6 big important people absolutely HAS TO HAVE a gay person amongst it? Nah. It's just to show it off in a prominent role simply to say they do.

[Grax]

I think a big part of the representation obsession is because it's basically the cheapest and easiest way for people to seem like they are "doing something," because actually doing something that matters (giving resources to people) is difficult or politically impossible.

And if you are more cynical, just pure grift and corporate cover. The Diversity industry is worth billions. There's actually a major vested interest in stuff not improving now, fun!

When sexuality and skin color become a replacement for having a personality.

[Sammonoske]

The Woke Scouter is over 9000.

[Mehrunes]

just ignore them, they are clearly in here posting utter bullshit to get a rise out of people along with a few of the usual suspects, not worth trying to argue with them since anything you provide as proof they will wave away as some sort of 'haha you call that evidence' strawman ad nauseum.

I wonder if you see the irony of saying all of that in support of the guy pushing the idea (explicitly confirmed to be what that user was expressing there like two posts later) that trans people "groom" others into them becoming trans rather than the person disputing that. Because that isn't how anything works. And doesn't even make sense. At least when that "argument" is levied against gays there's some actual benefit to gay people in that it'd result in more gay people for them to date, so the "grooming" nomenclature almost works (if you first drown the part of your brain that's responsible for comprehending that's now how gayness works either in copious amounts of alcohol). But there's nothing of the sort for trans people.

~3.5% LGBTQ people worldwide pop and .3% trans. Have one or so in every show? Maybe not out of the ordinary. Have them as one of the absolute central plot characters every time? Yeah. That's starting to push it a little bit. Like every group of 3-6 big important people absolutely HAS TO HAVE a gay person amongst it? Nah. It's just to show it off in a prominent role simply to say they do.

Since being central to any plot isn't really a thing IRL, gay characters being central to a plot is neither here nor there in regards to whether they are over-represented in shows or not. And given how I've seen the same commotion about any movie or show with any amount of gay characters, including even Avengers: Endgame (I dare you to point out the gay character there without Googling it), I don't really put much faith in the claims that gays hog the spotlight in the "central characters" space in the first place.

oh yeah,the prison system is bad in usa also,but not because its ''slavery'',its bad for entirely different reasons

Well, not entirely. The claim that slavery is still legal in US is actually true. Because US, being the world champion of social liberties, thought that the word "except" really fits in a piece of legislation abolishing slavery. As such slavery is still legal as a punishment for a crime. Which may not be responsible for all of the woes of its prison system, but likely plays a role in the prison labor part of it.

[BeepBoo]

Since being central to any plot isn't really a thing IRL, gay characters being central to a plot is neither here nor there in regards to whether they are over-represented in shows or not.

Not really IMO. It doesn't feel like 3.5% of the time you're seeing a LBGTQ person if they're central to the plot getting 30% of the screen time. Not that it particularly matters to me. My favorite characters have often been in that statistical anomaly group in some recent shows. Just saying if the point is it should be as rare as it is in real life, they're missing the mark, and there's an obvious reason for it besides "it just naturally occurred to us to make this character gay because it felt right!"

I don't really put much faith in the claims that gays hog the spotlight in the "central characters" space in the first place.

Depends. It's less a movie thing and more a TV series thing, and namely scifi and fantasy. If that's what you watch because it's the things you like most, you might get a different picture from people with more diverse entertainment tastes.

[Chilela]

And, on topic...

WHAT the FUCK was ActivisionBlizzard thinking when they released this as a PRESS RELEASE?

Thinking about it, this seems like something that'd come out as some shady as fuck "Yeah, Trust Me" leak from HQ that we all just dismiss as "Nah... ActivisionBlizzard isn't THAT stupid... are they???"

I thought about this earlier today, and the only answer I could even think of is that it was 100% to appease shareholders. At this point, I'm not sure there's any major part of the community that really wanted this. The pro-diversity crowd sees this as blatant corporate pandering and/or attempting to coverup ongoing issues, yet again. The anti-diversity crowd, well, that one's self-explanatory. If nothing else, it's at least given the Internet fresh memeing material.

[Edge-]

This thread has gone all kinds of bad places with forbidden topics. Shutting this down.