Jump to content
Chain_shot

So not trying to create a major poop storm- orientation question

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,090
[46856]
Members
2,252 posts

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous. But if there were some notable people with that orientation, is War Gaming ever going to recognize them as commanders?

What would be the downside of recognizing these people and their contributions  for WG?

Edited by Chain_shot
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,179
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,233 posts
4,348 battles

Let's just worry about people who did noteworthy things in naval battle within the game's timeframe, what they did outside of that should be irrelevant.

Edited by AJTP89
  • Cool 21
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
189 posts
18,590 battles

I honestly believe that any historical commander that should be included in the game must be because of their merits or actions in the naval history. And not by his sexual preferences.

 

  • Cool 7
  • Thanks 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,411
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
16,478 posts
4,774 battles
18 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous. But if there were some notable people with that orientation, is War Gaming ever going to recognize them as commanders?

What would be the downside of recognizing these people and their contributions  for WG?

Because they are almost completely unknown.  Until fairly recently, any form of homosexual practice was punishable by hanging, and propensities were *well* best hid.

Besides, what's the point of singling out a group?  Treat them like everyone else.  The only way to get rid of discrimination is to not discriminate.

  • Cool 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,360
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
26,075 posts
22,336 battles
2 minutes ago, TheGreatKiller26 said:

I honestly believe that any historical commander that should be included in the game must be because of their merits or actions in the naval history. And not by his sexual preferences.

This. Just give me historically interesting commanders, known for what they did. Who they shared their bed with is of absolutely no interest to me whatsoever.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,409
[OIL-1]
[OIL-1]
Members
1,911 posts

Feels like you're trying to fix a pothole while the bridge is collapsing.
The issue has merit, and is timely given todays mainstream news,
but when the whole world is on fire, I don't think it will generate much interest.

And as the others have stated, if the commander was great, he was great. We don't care about his private life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,010
[PVE]
Members
7,465 posts

This is probably not an appropriate subject for the forum.  Others have already given a more diplomatic answer.  But you asked a question, so I'll play the devil's advocate.  What would the downside be?  The possible downside would be the idea of pandering to a progressive ideology that only a tiny segment of the worldwide audience shares.  While I'm sure some people that don't support that ideology would just brush it off, others might take offense.  I think you can understand why it might be problematic if some ideology you don't agree with was pushed forward in this game.  No one take offense, I'm just answering the question asked. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
437
[AC1]
Members
246 posts
380 battles

Everyone is far too worried about what other people do behind closed doors.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,941
[SALVO]
Members
9,013 posts
6,716 battles
25 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous.

In modern history it would be difficult to find examples since it was considered a punishable offense.

I guess you could search names in the ancient greek history, but the morality involved was very different to the point I don't think "gay" makes sense for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,502
[DVYJC]
Members
4,427 posts
11,860 battles
44 minutes ago, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous. But if there were some notable people with that orientation, is War Gaming ever going to recognize them as commanders?

What would be the downside of recognizing these people and their contributions  for WG?

I don't get it. How do you know some of the generic commanders you have aren't gay? I can at least understand people saying there should be ethnically diverse commanders to reflect the navies and countries for ships in the game, because when you look at a commander in port, you can see his or her ethnicity. But sexual orientation has nothing to do with the game, nothing to do with the pixel commanders ostensibly captaining our ships, and can't be visually discerned by looking at pixel art.

This question is just proof that Wargaming players can rival Wargaming itself when it comes to coming up with useless ideas.

Edited by RainbowFartingUnicorn
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,828
[NG-NL]
Members
6,604 posts
10,993 battles

Commanders are in-game because of their achievements as navy folks and in some cases, incredible  leadership.

I fail to see what's useful about adding someone based merely on the sexual-preference he or she chose. Like, what use is sexual-preference, say, in aiming Dauntless DBs at Midway? Or the massive airstrike to take down Yamato?

Right now I'm Ainz Ooal Gown typing this diplomatic-as-salt post. Ah, but that's it, right? Choice of what I call myself does not change the content of this post, nor anything of note.

Best advice is keep your privates tucked away; bedroom is a private decision, keep it that way. Otherwise, come across as a vain thing begging for attention. You can do more productive things than that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,090
[46856]
Members
2,252 posts
7 minutes ago, Reymu said:

Best advice is keep your privates tucked away; bedroom is a private decision, keep it that way. Otherwise, come across as a vain thing begging for attention. You can do more productive things than that. 

You get that people were situated in a position where their orientation had a possible consequence of punishment or marginalization  at the least. And that had what to do with the war effort? How did punishing or denying their story them help such war efforts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[CLUMP]
Members
2,051 posts
2,424 battles
1 hour ago, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous. But if there were some notable people with that orientation, is War Gaming ever going to recognize them as commanders?

What would be the downside of recognizing these people and their contributions  for WG?

 

Adding people that have done nothing of military world-historical value to naval game theme :Smile_teethhappy: This is a military theme game even though they have added it anime characters even then they have military theme also :Smile_hiding: You know EA try doing this with battlefield 5 when they add this trying to rewrite world history :Smile_popcorn: 

68Eijqw.jpg

When they could have added many other real examples instead of adding this :fish_palm:  It seems they learn their lesson 2042

 

 

1 hour ago, AJTP89 said:

Let's just worry about people who did noteworthy things in naval battle within the game's timeframe, what they did outside of that should be irrelevant.

 

mTxgN5H.gif

 

1 hour ago, TheGreatKiller26 said:

I honestly believe that any historical commander that should be included in the game must be because of their merits or actions in the naval history. And not by his sexual preferences.

 

 

5zKOQQc.png

Edited by LastRemnant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,828
[NG-NL]
Members
6,604 posts
10,993 battles
1 minute ago, Chain_shot said:

You get that people were situated in a position where their orientation had a possible consequence of punishment or marginalization  at the least. And that had what to do with the war effort? How did punishing or denying their story them help such war efforts?

Everything I've ever read  on WW1 and 2 indicated that both sides of the war had two goals: 1) Win the war for their side and 2) Get it done so they could go home. Pragmatic thinking, not wishful, is how to survive longer esp. when said dangers ignore your sexual stuff (hungry lion comes to mind).

I'll leave it up to the SPF (sexual-preference folks), assuming they have access to original sources historians will kill to know about, to prove their minority played a role. Starts with proving they existed, for one, and that said choice--which I know is fluid, never concrete--became a motivation day in and day out.

My doubt of their existence therein is simple: bullets and bombs and sea water and sharks and disease aren't going to care what your bedroom thing is. Every person that went into battle knew full well it could be his last. Given all this, I have a hard time believing an average soldier would fail to realize that ah, his sexual-preference has no value or meaning; nothing heroic about a [edited] in and of himself, it is strictly his ability to do the job required in war that matters. Halsey, Yamamoto, Fletcher, Spruance, and so on are famous for their roles and accomplishments; sexual-preference has literally nothing to compare because quantitatively, it is a fluid decision, whereas roles and accomplishments get many difficult things done and leave records.

Of course, it'd be almost hilarious, say, if reason Enterprise survived as long as she did in WW2 was because staffed by SPF that frightened off Japanese air raids by displaying their privates en masse but as implied earlier, that would've left Big E seriously crippled: weaponry cares nothing about its targets. Japan and Germany were sworn enemies intent on defeating or damaging us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,321
[-TRM-]
[-TRM-]
Members
3,916 posts

Your orientation has no meaning outside the bedroom in that era or anytime before. There was no such prior to say 1960 or so. What happens in the bedroom stayed in the bedroom and was taboo entirely in Society.

In history there are very few instances of people who were bent in that direction but frankly its not something for discussion anywhere. It was marginalized and swept out of sight.

However the OP did ask a valid question. Suppose there was a event>? Without getting into particulars you are going to have such a loss in customers participating with the company and game products due to the idea that this type of behavior is not only against Religion and God but also a crime against Humankind. And its simply not something worth attempting because overall as a percentage of society engaging in that type of behavior in their private lives (Deemed a disorder in Psychology that requires treatment among other problems) there isnt that many.

From what I understand of the Russian Culture and those of us who choose not to be woke or otherwise liberated so to speak of those who choose to be deviant that would be the one event in which the game product will be condemned to the trash bin virtually overnight.

When we play this game its about warships and the game itself. Orientation and other real world things have no meaning here and is excluded. I will not have any further time to consider this thing. Only that in the short space of 40 to 60 years we are able to even talk about something like this without being prosecuted or otherwise excluded. I myself am not of that lifestyle however I have had friends who chose to live their lives for better or worse, some dying from Aids in due time due to that kind of lifestyle among other problems that also killed them off. I attribute that to a natural determination that which is abhorrent would not endure in nature.

We are part of a Human Race whose one good thing is to procreate and raise a new generation to carry on after we are gone. And so on. Life continues. Anything else that does not naturally support this course of our existance over many millenia is something that will eventually cause our extinction in due time. Because you cannot have a natural future in such a situation.

Edited by xHeavy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
671 posts
18,002 battles

:shrug:

There weren’t any time period appropriate women commanders, yet my port still has plenty of Dasha and anime.

And it’s absurd for folks here to claim “merit” when gay seamen would have rarely been given the opportunity to captain a ship, and would have been hesitant to invite the background checks that come with it. Some likely were captains regardless. Their navies (and historians) certainly wouldn’t acknowledge the fact if they knew at all.

The only exception from the time period I know of even remotely close to the military was Alan Turing (and see what it got him).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,277
[CAAT]
Members
2,245 posts
5,190 battles
3 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

Let's just worry about people who did noteworthy things in naval battle within the game's timeframe, what they did outside of that should be irrelevant.

 

3 hours ago, TheGreatKiller26 said:

I honestly believe that any historical commander that should be included in the game must be because of their merits or actions in the naval history. And not by his sexual preferences.

 

 

3 hours ago, iDuckman said:

Because they are almost completely unknown.  Until fairly recently, any form of homosexual practice was punishable by hanging, and propensities were *well* best hid.

Besides, what's the point of singling out a group?  Treat them like everyone else.  The only way to get rid of discrimination is to not discriminate.

 

3 hours ago, Lert said:

This. Just give me historically interesting commanders, known for what they did. Who they shared their bed with is of absolutely no interest to me whatsoever.

 

2 hours ago, Reymu said:

Commanders are in-game because of their achievements as navy folks and in some cases, incredible  leadership.

I fail to see what's useful about adding someone based merely on the sexual-preference he or she chose. Like, what use is sexual-preference, say, in aiming Dauntless DBs at Midway? Or the massive airstrike to take down Yamato?

Right now I'm Ainz Ooal Gown typing this diplomatic-as-salt post. Ah, but that's it, right? Choice of what I call myself does not change the content of this post, nor anything of note.

Best advice is keep your privates tucked away; bedroom is a private decision, keep it that way. Otherwise, come across as a vain thing begging for attention. You can do more productive things than that.

Stop, stooooop!!! I can only like SO MANY POSTS, you guys!!!

Animated gif about gif in Sailor Moon 🌙 by Kisarra

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
530
[VORTX]
Members
689 posts
8,890 battles
3 hours ago, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous. But if there were some notable people with that orientation, is War Gaming ever going to recognize them as commanders?

What would be the downside of recognizing these people and their contributions  for WG?

Historically, as others have pointed out already, to be openly gay in the military was a no no up until very recently. Historically speaking, to focus on ones preferred gender attraction over military achievements would be blatant pandering. If you can find someone, have at it. 
 

In fantasy land, there isn’t any difference between a queer commander or a anime one or your creepy AF Dasha. If WG thinks they can sell you queer commanders, you’re going to see them. I am going to venture out onto a limb and assume the market isn’t very large for that particular commodity, but who knows.
 

Speaking for myself, If I could have a special commander who’s special abilities include shooting unicorns out the main guns,  glitter out the secondaries and rainbows out the funnel; crap, I might have to have it, that sounds like a lot more fun that Kong. 

Edited by Pirate_Named_Sue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,411
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
16,478 posts
4,774 battles

Well, I see the topic has been yeeted.  Better than closure, I suppose.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,411
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
16,478 posts
4,774 battles
2 minutes ago, Pirate_Named_Sue said:

Speaking for myself, If I could have a special commander who’s special abilities include shooting unicorns out the main guns,  glitter out the secondaries and rainbows out the funnel; crap, I might have to have it, that sounds like a lot more fun that Kong. 

Add musical show tunes on the box and I might have a go my own self.

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,180
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,521 posts
6 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

Let's just worry about people who did noteworthy things in naval battle within the game's timeframe, what they did outside of that should be irrelevant.

When the commander of the WACs was asked by Eisenhower to "ferret out" the lesbians in the corps she told him that if she did that would include her and about 95% of the rest of the outfit too. I don't care what your orientation is as long as you do your job -- just don't get in my face about it and expect me to support your "cause" -- life your life and let me live mine.

Quote

Your mother's right, she's really up on things.
Before we married, mommy served in the WACS in the Philippines.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
242
[WOLF3]
Members
568 posts

I come here to blow ships up and chat on the misc forum. I do NOT come here, nor would I WANT to come here, to have such an issue thrown in my face...and this is coming from someone heading into a same sex marriage.

Let me blow stuff up in peace, and I suspect that is what the vast overwhelming MAJORITY of people here want.

 

Now if they had Freddie Mercury as a commander then I am all in!

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,824
[PVE]
Members
8,821 posts
25,144 battles
56 minutes ago, SteffisCute said:

Now if they had Freddie Mercury as a commander then I am all in!

With a "We Will Rock You"/"We Are The Champions" (although there are plenty of other good options there) soundtrack...works for me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,824
[PVE]
Members
8,821 posts
25,144 battles
On 6/30/2021 at 12:27 PM, Chain_shot said:

Not sure if there were many gay seamen in both great wars or how many became famous.

There is an exact number for that...

ZERO.

War ended in '45...Woodstock (where even the slightest inclination of acceptance of that began) was 24 years later.

As any commanders from WWII would have been at least in their 40s at the time by '69 they were...well...69...

& as the only crowd that was in acceptance of it during Woodstock were the anti war crowd there would have been zero WWII ship commanders that were ever "famous" for it because what purpose would be served by a WWII commander coming out in the age of flower power to say they were gay...& who exactly would their "fans" (something required for fame...unless it's "notorious" fame...although even some of them have their fans) have been?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×