Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Orange Wizard]

And I was agreeing with his point. Not entirely irrespective of my personal beliefs, however.

[IndigoFenix]

I think a lot of the problem here is adding orientation to the game before the idea of extramarital breeding, leading to some confused code.  That is, as far as the game is concerned, marriage = children, so only creatures that would commit to each other (if they were sapient) can even have children (even if they are non-sapient) which is highly unrealistic.

Many animals aren't picky about what they'll mate with, and some may even prefer same-sex, but typically you'd expect a healthy bull penned with a bunch of cows to directly lead to a bunch of pregnant cows, regardless of that bull's personal preferences.

Honestly I think the system of setting each individual creature's absolute orientation in stone at birth so that they can never marry or form a relationship with someone opposed to their orientation is kind of an unrealistic to begin with - along with 'strongly' homosexual or heterosexual individuals, there are plenty that fall somewhere in the middle.  It would make more sense to place each individual creature's orientation at some point on a sliding scale, and evaluate that along with other factors such as personality and shared experiences in determining whether or not two creatures will form relationships or marry - to say nothing of cultural values, etc.  Also it would be nice if it were tied to caste, not just gender, for interesting modding systems, like a noble caste that will usually only marry other nobles or something.  The whole system feels a little half-baked compared to Toady's usual work.

[Putnam]

It's a 9-point scale--interestedness in one sex is completely independent of the other.

[Spectre Incarnate]

The whole system feels a little half-baked compared to Toady's usual work.

I agree with a lot of that. It's very non-realistic and absolute right now and there's no adoption for dwarves or selective breeding for livestock (aside from the usual dorfy methods), but gay relationships are a new thing and may not be fully developed. Toady may simply be waiting to see what the general public reaction to this feature would be, which seems to be mostly positive so far, just not all the mechanics for it, and possibly hear suggestions about improving it before developing it further.

[reality.auditor]

The whole system feels a little half-baked compared to Toady's usual work.

Huh? No, it is normal. Whole DF is, in fact, bunch of half-baked ideas (named "placeholders" if you want to be nice) that are further developed.

And discussion on treatment of gay anything in DF by players is pretty irrevelant. This is DF, where kitten genocide, dwarven daycare, mermaid bone harvest, treatment of elves like Jews by Nazis etc are pretty normal. Culling of gay animals barely register on atrocity-o-meter. Putting gay dwarves in ghetto (as proposed by tahujdt) is better, but still tame in comparison of usual madness happening in DF.

What next? When Toady introduces truly multicultural/racial fortresses, will anyone be surprised that some players will periodically perform ethnic cleansing? And will worry about "message" sent by Toady? First thing first: if there were any message, it would be sent by player, not Toady. Come on, it is pretty stupid.

[Tirion]

Why would anyone kill all but one of the males? Kill the weak ones, yes, but keeping half a dozen "He is incredibly muscular and just gigantic overall" types alive instead of one has negligible disadvantages. What I'm more worried about is how orientation is invisible. And I hope the "they could marry if they were sentient" code doesn't check for being related, because animal's relations aren't even visible to players right now.

[Col_Jessep]

All I'm going to say on this topic is that I bought 2 grizzlies from the longears and I really hope they both want to have many, many, many little ones. ,,,^..^,,,~

I want to give every soldier in my melee squad a war grizzly. How awesome would that be!

[Spectre Incarnate]

And discussion on treatment of gay anything in DF by players is pretty irrevelant. This is DF, where kitten genocide, dwarven daycare, mermaid bone harvest, treatment of elves like Jews by Nazis etc are pretty normal. Culling of gay animals barely register on atrocity-o-meter. Putting gay dwarves in ghetto (as proposed by tahujdt) is better, but still tame in comparison of usual madness happening in DF.

You are somewhat misunderstanding. This was not about our typical, healthy, enjoyable sadism in a fantasy game. This was about a couple users bringing their specific social (and most likely religious) viewpoints into the thread, using the game to bolster their beliefs that gays are bad for society and make pointed statements to the rest of us about those beliefs. There is a big difference in culling cats and elves and mermaids for fun in a fantasy setting and using the culling of cats and elves and mermaids as a justification for your personal beliefs, attempting to drive a point.

Based on what was previously discussed, it is quite obvious that a satellite colony of gay dwarves in the game will not be able to produce children, thus it was a very blatant remark that gay people in real life are worthless to society if they can not produce children. And when confronted about it, they gave lame excuses and backed out.

[tahujdt]

And discussion on treatment of gay anything in DF by players is pretty irrevelant. This is DF, where kitten genocide, dwarven daycare, mermaid bone harvest, treatment of elves like Jews by Nazis etc are pretty normal. Culling of gay animals barely register on atrocity-o-meter. Putting gay dwarves in ghetto (as proposed by tahujdt) is better, but still tame in comparison of usual madness happening in DF.

You are somewhat misunderstanding. This was not about our typical, healthy, enjoyable sadism in a fantasy game. This was about a couple users bringing their specific social (and most likely religious) viewpoints into the thread, using the game to bolster their beliefs that gays are bad for society and make pointed statements to the rest of us about those beliefs. There is a big difference in culling cats and elves and mermaids for fun in a fantasy setting and using the culling of cats and elves and mermaids as a justification for your personal beliefs, attempting to drive a point.

Based on what was previously discussed, it is quite obvious that a satellite colony of gay dwarves in the game will not be able to produce children, thus it was a very blatant remark that gay people in real life are worthless to society if they can not produce children. And when confronted about it, they gave lame excuses and backed out.

Backed out? How so? You *wound* me, sir. And are you suggesting that giving gay dwarves the same chance as straight dwarves is unfair? Surely not! And "lame excuses"? Which ones?

[Absentia]

Can we just... not have this argument? It's easy enough to change the raws if you want to avoid the issue entirely, and we don't need to create bad feelings over a charged real-life issue in our fantasy world.

[Orange Wizard]

Spectre, if you have a problem with me, feel free to send a PM. That goes for anyone else who was offended by or disapproves of what I've said.
Alternatively, if you believe the things that someone has said are legitimately hateful, report it to Toady as per our forum guidelines.
Otherwise, this thread isn't the place for it. Too many threads have been derailed into silly "hurr durr homophobia durr" arguments lately. Please don't drag this one down, too.

[Spectre Incarnate]

Done. Sent a PM.

[Tirion]

With all the hate fort-mode children get, I don't see why homosexual dwarves aren't welcomed and weaponized. If the overseer has a few dwarves who are guaranteed to not produce children, and others who can have children as long as they are married and both alive, the choice of who will be a soldier or other high-risk profession and who will be held in the safety of the fortress as part of a breeding couple becomes a lot easier.

tl;dr: you see gays, I see soldiers who never bring babies to a fight, and weavers who never have idiotic children following them in the d-o-r restricted traffic GCS silk farm to get stuck in precious webs.

[reality.auditor]

Backed out? How so? You *wound* me, sir. And are you suggesting that giving gay dwarves the same chance as straight dwarves is unfair? Surely not! And "lame excuses"? Which ones?

There are tons of people that are not gay and cannot have children. Are they worthless scum too?

[Tirion]

Backed out? How so? You *wound* me, sir. And are you suggesting that giving gay dwarves the same chance as straight dwarves is unfair? Surely not! And "lame excuses"? Which ones?

There are tons of people that are not gay and cannot have children. Are they worthless scum too?

IRL we are really not the last bastion of our dwindling species, in fact we are way above any reasonable population cap.