Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文(簡体字中国語)
繁體中文(繁体字中国語)
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia(インドネシア語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português(ポルトガル語-ポルトガル)
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
The entire point of putting art in public is for people to consider it. So yeah, she if she didn't want critical apprasal she should have kept her art private. That's how art works.
But I do love how you have conflated people pointing out her art was bad with "victim blaming."
So, I am going to assume you have never been critical of any work of art, ever?
There's a fine line between considering arts and sending scary death threats at the innocent artist like every moron SFWs.
I have a bachelor's in arts dude, you don't know what the ♥♥♥♥ you're talking about.
And people aren't being critical of her work, their being critical of a perceived sleight, it's disingenuous to portray the argument like you are.
If you bothered to read this thread you could find a couple dozen examples of critical appraisal none of which contain death threats.
Yeah, I'm not the one who doesn't know what he is talking about. If there is a slight, then that is part of the artwork. Either it is intentional, in which case she was deliberately being provocative. Or it is unintentional, in which case her art was just poorly thought out. Either way (and I think I know which way this art is).
The fact that you don't understand this would mean you don't understand decades worth of protest art, performance art, and the very basics of critical theory.
And speaking of disingenuous, whether her art was good or bad is an entirely separate and unrelated subject to whether the artist received death threats. You conflating the two is absolutely disingenuous.
As we can tell by several people in this thread, the right-wingers saw an opportunity to attack trans people and immediately grabbed onto it.
You're the one who said I was conflating people saying her art was bad with victim blaming when in reality people arent discussing her shading or if the designs are flat and contrived, they're saying "yeah death threats are bad but she shouldnt have pissed off tumblr. So yeah you're right, it's an entirely different subject you brought up.
She didn't know Damien was trans, so yeah it's a perceived sleight. The people saying the gendered switched Damien is now a trans woman are just as right as the people saying the act of drawing it was transphobic, they both alter the same amount of reality to fit things in.
Also lol at the right winger thing, I voted for Obama twice and I've protested for gay rights at rallies. Do go on, continue to make internet strawmen that conform to your biases.
So you actually don't know anything about art criticism? Because if you did you would know what you said was just monumentally ignorant. Guess what? Both art and art criticism extend beyond composition. You should know that just from La trahison des images.
Like I said, her art work was poorly thought out. Which makes it bad. If you are doing art and you don't understand your own subject... you aren't making good art. And frankly, doing a gender swapped version of this game isn't going to result in anything approaching good art, well ever.
And that comment wasn't directed towards you, which is why it wasn't said to you. It was about people who have words like "Fuher" in their names, don't own the game, and put stuff like "cuck patrol" in their bios.
Ah, then for that I apologize.
...This makes no sense as a response. Literally none. Go back, look at the thought process that made you write this, and then reconsider.
Because they would still be heterosexual. See, a key factor in heterosexuality is that there are two genders involved. So if you change a heterosexual character's gender, you are not changing their sexual orientation. In particular if you happen to change both characters in a heterosexual couple. However you can't be a gay man unless you happen to be both gay and a man.
Also, because you seem to lack reading comprehension, when I mentioned erasing, I wasn't talking about any aspect of the characters. I was talking about how the art erased what, presumably, is the target audience. A target audience that has almost no content whatsoever designed for them, so going, "But what if... this was a game for heterosexuals!" is, at the very least, going to be in incredibly poor taste.
Just as a side note, you don't need three sets of quotation marks to quote someone.
Helpful hint, if you want people to take you seriously as a not horrible human being, I wouldn't throw that particular word around. Also the fact that you wrote four sentences and managed to get everything wrong, say nothing, fail at logic, and demonstrate extreme ignorance makes it a real glass houses situation.
I'm not entirely sure how many genders there are presently, but I'm pretty sure most combinations of them aren't considered "heterosexual". And changing someones gender always changes their sexual orientation, because that's linked to both the person's gender and the gender they're attracted to.
I really hate to burst your bubble here, but this game's target audience, is a combination of youtubers, gay men, and young to middle-aged women.
And no, going "what is if was a game made for heterosexuals?" is not in poor taste at all. Genderbent art of straight characters is very common. As is homosexual fanfiction of heterosexual fictional characters and real life celebrities. No one throws a huge fit over it.
A horrible human being? Gotta disagree. But yes, it's definitely not a word to be used in a civil discussion where you actually want to be taken seriously.
It doesn't make sense because at no point was anyone disputing the existence of lesbians.
No, it doesn't. That's a point trans people have been attempting to make for decades now.
I, in fact, agree with this point. Based off the creators' interviews, the target audience was not gay men. The only reason the game got made was because it was an inside joke made at Disney World that allowed them to attempt to subvert dating sims. The only reason it is based around male homosexuality is because that is the most subversive form of sexuality they could think of. All of that trickles down into all the various problem elements of the game (such as its deeply moralizing posturing).
However, as problematic and disappointing as it is as a piece of media, we still have to consider that it is a game focused on male homosexuality (as exploitative or dismissive as it might be). And therefor contextualize it as one of the tiny, tiny handful of video games about male homosexuality.
Yeah, it is. If your reaction to gay male sexuality is to try to make it straight, then it is only marginally better than disgust.
Just because it is common does not mean it is good. And good genderbent art is supposed to illuminate the ways in which the origional works treat gender. Hence why Disney is a frequent target. Or, in the realm of video games, there is this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMfggshW7bg
Where Ryu from Street Fighter is swapped in for characters R. Mika and Laura, which rather excellently dissects the ways in which making someone intentionally sexy is different from falling ass backwards into a character design that some people think is sexy.
The only real illumination possible with genderbending gay male sexuality is showing how quickly people will attempt to erase gay male sexuality.
Well that's just wrong. Many, many real life celebrities do not like it. And let's not even get into Sherlock and fan fiction. There is a reason fan fiction has such a negative reputation.
The original fan fiction, going back to Star Trek here, were about textualizing subtext or exploring ideas that were implicit in the text, but under explored.
The idea of women as sexualized and romantically desirable is hardly an under explored idea.
"And changing someones gender always changes their sexual orientation, because that's linked to both the person's gender and the gender they're attracted to."
Nope. There is bi/pan etc. Nothing changes.