I've been gone too long, I chose a few random posts to reply to.
"I'll drop it if you do" - what arrogance. Since all I did was outline my proposal - and you've done nothing but bitch and complain about something that CAN be implemented without totally squicking Toady out and introducing elements that clearly make quite a large chunk of the player-base uncomfortable.
You are the one who wants to end debate, not me.
And you haven't offered any working model which is a viable alternative. I can actually show how mine works.
If you say "I don't care that it makes others uncomfortable I want it in the game!"- then mod it into your own game, or propose a modding framework which allows it, don't demand every copy of the game ship with your personal wishlist of features as the default. Toady clearly doesn't like adult elements in the game, demanding them and that every other player be forced to deal with it - well that just isn't going to happen in a million years, so get a realistic obsession.
Why is conflict over homosexuality different than religious conflict, or racial conflict, or whatever? Why is it okay and not a statement to have goblins and dwarves, who are clearly differentiated by skin color and such, fight, but having a religious group dislike homosexuals and discriminate against them not okay and a big political statement? And didn't someone say a while back that Toady said he'd eventually include homosexuality? I'm pretty sure I remember that.
For clarification, I actually entered this thread by outlining a RAW framework within which same-sex unions could be modeled, so don't lump me in with anyone saying the game shouldn't have teh gays - it's a straw man since that was never my position, but I can just feel both of you itching to shift the goalposts.
I specifically was opposed to the idea that the vanilla game would include auto-generated porgroms against gays, please don't try to stretch that to saying I'm anti-gay or said the game shouldn't have gays at all. GreatWyrmGold was specifically opposed to my proposal to have gays added but without social stigma.
This is specifically why I worded it on the last page, that i thought it very unlikely Toady would code "gay bashing"(i even bolded that term to make it clearer) rather than just saying he wouldn't code "gays". He's said he'd code gays, yes. He's never said he'd code gays being beaten up, which is the specific proposal of GreatWyrmGold that I disagreed with.
Are you also opposed to, say, religious conflict or wars based on the fact that they're goblins and we're humans? Or is there some factor that makes those incredibly different than conflict against homosexuals?
People care about homosexuals? It strikes to close to heart? Guess what, religious wars and racism and stuff are important to people, in one way or another, and all are close to many people's hearts.
The point is that Toady, by doing anything other than promising equality, will be making a political statement. One others may not agree with. Like any controversial issue, if homosexuality is forced upon the player than you risk losing them.
Except it really oughtn't be controversial in the first place. It's not Toady's fault if homophobic attitudes still exist in society.
Agreed. What fundamental difference is there between "gay-bashing" and racism? Aside from the targets, of course.
[auote]
In almost any game where homoexuality is available its an option, one the player has to initiate. Don't want your fable guy to be gay? don't give a dude flowers. Don't want Shelby the Sim to be gay? Don't flirt with chicks.
Those are games where you control individual characters directly. That is not the case here. For that matter, in The Sims, sims have autonomy anyway (especially neighbors you aren't immediately controlling), and can and will do things like that without your instigation.
[/quote]
Indeed.
The point is that Toady, by doing anything other than promising equality, will be making a political statement. One others may not agree with. Like any controversial issue, if homosexuality is forced upon the player than you risk losing them. In almost any game where homoexuality is available its an option, one the player has to initiate. Don't want your fable guy to be gay? don't give a dude flowers. Don't want Shelby the Sim to be gay? Don't flirt with chicks.
One of his games is named Liberal Crime Squad. An approved method of playing is going around shooting conservatives. I don't think he's shy about making a political statement, to be honest.
Fix'd.
You forgot to mention the presence of homosexuality in the game, or how gay rights are one of the issues the LCS kills Conservatives over.
This is a problem we should probobly talk about if dorfs get a new brain. First we'd have to define how important sex is for dwaves, and if they are doing it just to make kids and pass on their name and legend. Or if they, "just want to have fun." I imagine this would be different for humans, and gobbos and elves ect.
Mentioned early on, no point to homosexuals without romance.
-----
Here's my point of view.
Homosexuality has no reason to be left out, but at the moment several features are absent that are needed to make it worthwhile.
Romance and love are obvious features needed, assuming dwarves even experience these feelings how humans do. If marriage and intercourse are just for children, there's no point in homosexuality, because it's just a different type of friendship that wouldn't be notably different than a platonic relationship.
I see no fundamental difference between conflict over homosexuality and other conflicts, and since such conflicts exist both now and in the past, it's sensible to assume that nothing in particular should prevent conflict over gays happening if, say, racial discrimination or religious wars are permissible.
Author
Topic: Should Dwarves Have Sexual Orientations? (Read 26179 times)