387 réponses à ce sujet

[Volus Warlord]

Grestorn wrote...



Wow...

Some people might think it takes a lot of courage to admit being gay in public. But to openly admit this kind of stupidity must be much harder.

Here we have a classic example of ad hominem- that is, attacking the person rather than refuting their argument.

Here, I'll give this technique a shot:

"Yeah, well you're so ****ing stupid you make the stooges obselete."

I think we accomplished a whole lot there.

[Carfax]

Zandilar wrote..

Most animals are sexually reproducing creatures. Check out the Bonobo for an example of a species where casual sex between members of the same gender occurs all the time as part of their social interaction. They, along with chimps, are among our closest cousins. Being gay does not preclude one from reproducing either, especially considering that ****** sapiens are a thinking technologically advanced tool using species. If you were to believe MSM, most (if not all) Lesbians exist solely to reproduce. (Yes, that is kind of a joke right there, but many of us are tired of all the "lesbian wants to get pregnant" storylines that get air time on TV.)

I personally don't like using animals as examples because they are so governed by their instincts, unlike humans.  They are not aware as we are..  For example, "homosexuality" amongst Giraffes is supposed to be very common.  Males will mount each other, often to the point of ejaculation.  Many gay advocates use examples like this to show that animals can be "gay" as well.

But Giraffes have also been observed mounting other species of animals like donkeys and horses etc..  In fact, there is a picture floating around the web some where of a bull Giraffe mounting a donkey or mule.. 

So my point is, animals do engage in homosexual behaviour yes, but also remember they are completely and utterly governed by their sexual instincts and have very little discriminative ability.  Dogs have also been observed humping inanimate objects like lamp posts.

And yes, I do realize that being gay does not preclude one from reproduction.  However, my point is that our species is fundamentally geared towards sexual reproduction with the opposite sex, all the way down to our genetic level.

Gay men still have sperm, and lesbians still have eggs.  The penis is shaped for entry into the vaginal canal, and the vaginal canal is contoured to accept a penis.  When something is ingrained this deeply into our biological makeup, it has consequences.

Unlike animals, we are aware of these qualities in ourselves.....which is exactly what  has produced the animosity towards homosexuals throughout the centuries because people look at gays and think they have contradicted the natural order or God's plan.

If this is true (especially about the action bit), does this not indicate latent bisexuality in people who later identify as straight?

No, I think all it means is that environmental factors can definitely influence sexual behaviour, but it cannot change someone's orientation, or innate disposition.

It's like men in prison, some of which resort to homosexual acts to relieve their sexual urges.  But once they leave prison, they never have sexual contact with other men ever again..
 

But you were attracted to those boys, no? Wouldn't that indicate to you a latent bisexual leaning, if this was someone else telling you about it?

Was I attracted to those boys back then?  Yes I was I suppose.  But, looking back on it, those attractions were the result of being in an environment with very few females, and being of a certain age when my sexuality was just emerging.

My sexual energy was thus channeled towards the most convenient targets; other boys, which were all around me..   Even then, the boys that I was attracted to were very feminine in their appearance. 

But once I was removed from that male only environment, my innate sexual orientation took over and now I'm exclusively attracted to women with no more thought or regard for other males. 

[The_FenixV]

Carfax wrote...

The_FenixV wrote...

I believe the society he is mentioning is Ancient Greece. Spartan men slept with other men, though it wasn't really seen as homosexuality back in the days, I guess they were more comfortable back then with what they were doing compared to this time. 

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece is blown way out of proportion.  The way some people describe it, makes you wonder how that Civilization managed to survive, considering there was so much homosexuality occuring.

Anyway, I don't know much about Sparta, but I do know that in Ancient Greece (Athens to be precise), homosexuality between two adult consenting men was actually frowned upon..

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece seemed confined mostly to the aristorcratic class, and revolved mostly around pederasty; or boy love.  And there were plenty of rules involved as well.

Ancient Rome had a much harsher view of homosexuality as well, depending on the time frame.  For example, there was a law named Lex Scantinia that prescribed the death penalty to men who had sex with underage free born boys, and men who had sex with other free born men.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Scantinia

Tell me about it haha. Visited Greece and checked the musuems, wonderful place but yeah Spartans were different, they respect the men that way. They were a breed of warriors though one of the best in Ancient Greece. However I do not think they considered it homosexual, after all they could face death at any time. At least that's what my guide told me.. and if you buy a pack of erotic gaming cards in there... you'll see some weird stuff in those cards. 

Some of the greatest heroes were homosexual though, like Alexander the Great for example. 

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Why do I have a feeling that this thread was sparked by mine.......

[KenKenpachi]

The_FenixV wrote...

Carfax wrote...

The_FenixV wrote...

I believe the society he is mentioning is Ancient Greece. Spartan men slept with other men, though it wasn't really seen as homosexuality back in the days, I guess they were more comfortable back then with what they were doing compared to this time. 

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece is blown way out of proportion.  The way some people describe it, makes you wonder how that Civilization managed to survive, considering there was so much homosexuality occuring.

Anyway, I don't know much about Sparta, but I do know that in Ancient Greece (Athens to be precise), homosexuality between two adult consenting men was actually frowned upon..

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece seemed confined mostly to the aristorcratic class, and revolved mostly around pederasty; or boy love.  And there were plenty of rules involved as well.

Ancient Rome had a much harsher view of homosexuality as well, depending on the time frame.  For example, there was a law named Lex Scantinia that prescribed the death penalty to men who had sex with underage free born boys, and men who had sex with other free born men.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Scantinia

Tell me about it haha. Visited Greece and checked the musuems, wonderful place but yeah Spartans were different, they respect the men that way. They were a breed of warriors though one of the best in Ancient Greece. However I do not think they considered it homosexual, after all they could face death at any time. At least that's what my guide told me.. and if you buy a pack of erotic gaming cards in there... you'll see some weird stuff in those cards. 

Some of the greatest heroes were homosexual though, like Alexander the Great for example. 

Lol Greece and Rome were alike in that manner, its okay for the high class to be homosexual or to have multiple partners, but for the commoners it was frowned upon or illegal. And I think a great deal of the sexualization is dramatized more so in film. No Society could grow, last or make up its numbers that way. And Wars back then you did lose alot of guys. And two men sleeping together will never make a replacement. That and unless it was a slave it was frowned upon. The same story was repeated in Japan. It repeats today.

With enough money or a high enough social standing you can get away with pretty much anything. But in general bi and homosexuality were frowned upon. And among many carried the Death penalty. Even in the Modern Era strange things happen, for instance in China being gay or commiting acts of fornification are frowned upon and have harsh re-actions, meanwhile Mao slept with god knows how many virgians in an attempt to stay young.

And I would say Alexander was Bisexual. Considering he did sleep with women, hell he slept with both at the same time acording to most sources.

[Tazzmission]

colex91 wrote...

 Alright now that I have your attention. I just wanted to point something out that has been bothering me..

Why all the controversy? We are in 2011 now, gay people are here forever, have been here forever, and will always be...Get used to it. I appreciate everything Bioware did for "us", they gained a lot of respect from me. I hope they continue to create gay relationships in other games, not just fem-fem.

How come the gay controversy didn't start when we had fem-fem in Mass Effect 1,2 and DA:O? Ohh, that's right cause it's okay!! it's hot!! No, it's just unfair. Zevran has been the only male-male relationship I have seen since I started playing video games. I have been playing games since NES. 

If they are really making you feel uncomfortable in the game...Turn them down? Don't pick conversation options with the heart Icon? Don't be overly nice in bad situations? Be real,get real.
 
I'm sure making this won't even matter, I live in a small town in the NC mountains, I know what it is like to be spit on,cussed, made fun of, for being who I am. The only thing that has gotten me through the anti-gay mess is a brighter future for acceptance. Bioware you took a step towards that in this game, you gained a loyal fan. Just know that the majority of us don't care about the bisexual relationships. It's just the select few ignorant people that attempt to make it seem like it is a big deal.  
I'm done ranting, signing off....
Loyal Gay Bioware Fan,Cole   Peace.

im not against same sex romances in games, but i will say though youll have idiots at fox news and right wing bible thumpers protest on it though... look at what they did about the alien side ****** from me1 for example.

[KenKenpachi]

Tazzmission wrote...
im not against same sex romances in games, but i will say though youll have idiots at fox news and right wing bible thumpers protest on it though... look at what they did about the alien side ****** from me1 for example.

Can't just go after the  right on that, even a good part of the left wants video games to be controlled by law, can't begin to count the number of times NBC has made a big deal over it. Far side on both whats there way and nothing else as the general attitude toward gaming is whats its been for decades.

Its only for kids.

[Tazzmission]

KenKenpachi wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...
im not against same sex romances in games, but i will say though youll have idiots at fox news and right wing bible thumpers protest on it though... look at what they did about the alien side ****** from me1 for example.

Can't just go after the  right on that, even a good part of the left wants video games to be controlled by law, can't begin to count the number of times NBC has made a big deal over it. Far side on both whats there way and nothing else as the general attitude toward gaming is whats its been for decades.

Its only for kids.

tbh your right, both political sides only attack something just to gain a vote at the polls. the other thing i cant stand regarding the me1  fiasco from fox is they take the word of someone just because they have doctor in front of there name. my whole life ive played videogames and hell most of them were violent and yet i never killed anyone. i think its really hypocritical that both sides can critisize a 5 second ****** scene but push biblical nude images and say its ok. and the irony of the whole religion thing is you got catholic preists toching kids and yet wheres the outrange from that same community?

[Blood-Lord Thanatos]

Tazzmission wrote...

KenKenpachi wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...
im not against same sex romances in games, but i will say though youll have idiots at fox news and right wing bible thumpers protest on it though... look at what they did about the alien side ****** from me1 for example.

Can't just go after the  right on that, even a good part of the left wants video games to be controlled by law, can't begin to count the number of times NBC has made a big deal over it. Far side on both whats there way and nothing else as the general attitude toward gaming is whats its been for decades.

Its only for kids.

tbh your right, both political sides only attack something just to gain a vote at the polls. the other thing i cant stand regarding the me1  fiasco from fox is they take the word of someone just because they have doctor in front of there name. my whole life ive played videogames and hell most of them were violent and yet i never killed anyone. i think its really hypocritical that both sides can critisize a 5 second ****** scene but push biblical nude images and say its ok. and the irony of the whole religion thing is you got catholic preists toching kids and yet wheres the outrange from that same community?

I know a Catholic Priest who got angry everytime he heard of the sex abuse scandals, he was disgusted by the hypocrisy in the Vatican. He frequently used to say that his greatest regret was that very few catholic priests actually walk the talk of remaining chaste and celibate. Apparently, his anger was due to seeing his own nephew suffer from a similar case, and being powerless to do anything about it.

[KenKenpachi]

The grass is always greener man, its eaiser for me to poke fun at your house than it is to clean my own. Least thats how it seems, and that reminds me of those two black kids back in like...2002 or so that shot all those people on the free way and acted like GTA told them to do it. NBC had one hell of a crusade with that one.

Its like our government its almost a police state, and is in ganeral a joke, yet we call out everyone else for what they do. Grass is always greener. Why bother fixing my own, when I can point at how bad yours is to make mine look better.

And the age old tactic for governments is when ****s going bad throw something up for them to hate till they forget about it and go away.

As to the catholic issue, some of there number take issue, but just like US soldiers who do with the government, won't act on it, as its herasy to an extent. That being said, catholics just let your priests marry.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 31 mars 2011 - 07:18 .

[DinoCrisisFan]

Well said OP

[The_FenixV]

KenKenpachi wrote...

The_FenixV wrote...

Carfax wrote...

The_FenixV wrote...

I believe the society he is mentioning is Ancient Greece. Spartan men slept with other men, though it wasn't really seen as homosexuality back in the days, I guess they were more comfortable back then with what they were doing compared to this time. 

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece is blown way out of proportion.  The way some people describe it, makes you wonder how that Civilization managed to survive, considering there was so much homosexuality occuring.

Anyway, I don't know much about Sparta, but I do know that in Ancient Greece (Athens to be precise), homosexuality between two adult consenting men was actually frowned upon..

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece seemed confined mostly to the aristorcratic class, and revolved mostly around pederasty; or boy love.  And there were plenty of rules involved as well.

Ancient Rome had a much harsher view of homosexuality as well, depending on the time frame.  For example, there was a law named Lex Scantinia that prescribed the death penalty to men who had sex with underage free born boys, and men who had sex with other free born men.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Scantinia

Tell me about it haha. Visited Greece and checked the musuems, wonderful place but yeah Spartans were different, they respect the men that way. They were a breed of warriors though one of the best in Ancient Greece. However I do not think they considered it homosexual, after all they could face death at any time. At least that's what my guide told me.. and if you buy a pack of erotic gaming cards in there... you'll see some weird stuff in those cards. 

Some of the greatest heroes were homosexual though, like Alexander the Great for example. 

Lol Greece and Rome were alike in that manner, its okay for the high class to be homosexual or to have multiple partners, but for the commoners it was frowned upon or illegal. And I think a great deal of the sexualization is dramatized more so in film. No Society could grow, last or make up its numbers that way. And Wars back then you did lose alot of guys. And two men sleeping together will never make a replacement. That and unless it was a slave it was frowned upon. The same story was repeated in Japan. It repeats today.

With enough money or a high enough social standing you can get away with pretty much anything. But in general bi and homosexuality were frowned upon. And among many carried the Death penalty. Even in the Modern Era strange things happen, for instance in China being gay or commiting acts of fornification are frowned upon and have harsh re-actions, meanwhile Mao slept with god knows how many virgians in an attempt to stay young.

And I would say Alexander was Bisexual. Considering he did sleep with women, hell he slept with both at the same time acording to most sources.

He was attracted to a guy though, in love with one, he also had a wife but her purpose was only an heir, that's all he married her for. Strange times they lived in, in this time some people seem to go crazy about it. 

[Zandilar]

Carfax wrote...

I personally don't like using animals as examples because they are so governed by their instincts, unlike humans.  They are not aware as we are..  For example, "homosexuality" amongst Giraffes is supposed to be very common.  Males will mount each other, often to the point of ejaculation.  Many gay advocates use examples like this to show that animals can be "gay" as well.

There was a reason why I mentioned Bonobos in particular, and not other animal species. Bonobos in particular use same sex couplings for social reasons and for pleasure.

But, I would also point out that at our basic level, we're just animals too. We still have our instincts which we still follow, and there's nothing inherantly wrong with that.

Gay men still have sperm, and lesbians still have eggs.  The penis is shaped for entry into the vaginal canal, and the vaginal canal is contoured to accept a penis.  When something is ingrained this deeply into our biological makeup, it has consequences.

And we have hands with thumbs and fingers, which can be used to stimulate those sexual organs too. A vaginal canal just as easily takes fingers as it does a penis. Yet it wasn't all that long ago that masturbation was just as stigmtized as being gay.

Unlike animals, we are aware of these qualities in ourselves.....which is exactly what  has produced the animosity towards homosexuals throughout the centuries because people look at gays and think they have contradicted the natural order or God's plan.

If we truely contradict the natural order, don't you think humanity would have evolved past homosexuality? It is clear that homosexuality plays some part in the natural order, we might not understand what it is exactly, but there is some reason for it. If there was no reason, we would never have evolved to include that trait.

I am not touching "God's Plan" with a 10' barge pole. Too much of a can of worms to open here.

No, I think all it means is that environmental factors can definitely influence sexual behaviour, but it cannot change someone's orientation, or innate disposition.

It's like men in prison, some of which resort to homosexual acts to relieve their sexual urges.  But once they leave prison, they never have sexual contact with other men ever again..

But... Uh... well they could relieve themselves, couldn't they? I mean honestly, if they had no bisexual leanings at all, wouldn't masturbation fill that need? (I think this is probably getting to the point where it's inappropriate for discussion on this forum... >.<)

Was I attracted to those boys back then?  Yes I was I suppose.  But, looking back on it, those attractions were the result of being in an environment with very few females, and being of a certain age when my sexuality was just emerging.

My sexual energy was thus channeled towards the most convenient targets; other boys, which were all around me..   Even then, the boys that I was attracted to were very feminine in their appearance. 

But once I was removed from that male only environment, my innate sexual orientation took over and now I'm exclusively attracted to women with no more thought or regard for other males. 

I went to an all girls Catholic High School, and despite that I still socialized with plenty of boys. It probably helped that my hobbies brought me into contact with them - you know, computers and role playing. Made me an outcast at school, but you can't have everything. Surely you had opportunities to interact with girls?

[AlexMBrennan]

I went to an all girls Catholic High School, and despite that I still socialized with plenty of boys.

That was (presumably) the point - that one will fall in love with/be attracted to anyone (eventually) if one is locked up with them for long enough. Whether one would/should be considered "gay"/"straight" as a result of this and other external influences (e.g. drugs) is, of course, debatable.

Re animals vs humans: Humans are animals - specifically, Pans Narrans.
@Carfax: You have restored my faith in the Reverend Richard Dawkins*.





* That's not an error but an obscure reference.

[FlintlockJazz]

Moondoggie wrote...

I think Bioware just made all romancable characters universal to avoid the tons of inevitable whinging that happens when people find out they can't romance a character "I wanted to have guy on guy sexy time with Kaiden! You suck Bioware!"  And you get the idea. In the case of DAO it hardly mattered anyways since people just made mods that made all character romances universal XD I guess people really do want what they can't have.

Aye, which I think is a shame since it means all the romances have to be pretty general and vague to accomodate how different the PCs can be.  I'd like to see why the LI is attracted to my character and not just because 'they're the hero'.  Being unable to get someone on a particular playthrough would just mean something to consider for future replays for me, and those who don't like the restrictions would (well, should) be able to mod the game with the toolset like before.  Bioware are going to have whinging regardless, whether from those who want all to be available or from people like me who want the opposite, so they should not let that be the factor deciding on how LIs are implemented.

[Moondoggie]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

Aye, which I think is a shame since it means all the romances have to be pretty general and vague to accomodate how different the PCs can be.  I'd like to see why the LI is attracted to my character and not just because 'they're the hero'.  Being unable to get someone on a particular playthrough would just mean something to consider for future replays for me, and those who don't like the restrictions would (well, should) be able to mod the game with the toolset like before.  Bioware are going to have whinging regardless, whether from those who want all to be available or from people like me who want the opposite, so they should not let that be the factor deciding on how LIs are implemented.

I think some folks are just afraid of the real world where rejection is part of life so in their games they want to get what they want no matter what factors are involved. Personally i'd like more realistic aspects in game romances too but i doubt we'll see it as most players want the dating sim approach where you can get them to fawn over you just by chosing the right options. I think these people are setting themselves up for a fall when they see somebody they like and hit on them to get a reply of "ugh i'm straight get away from me!" Which ultimately happens more often than not unless you're in a club that caters especially for gay people and you have much more chance of success XD.

[Zandilar]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

I went to an all girls Catholic High School, and despite that I still socialized with plenty of boys.

That was (presumably) the point - that one will fall in love with/be attracted to anyone (eventually) if one is locked up with them for long enough. Whether one would/should be considered "gay"/"straight" as a result of this and other external influences (e.g. drugs) is, of course, debatable.

I think you missed my point, which was a single sex school does not spell the end of socialization with members of the opposite sex. Unless it's a boarding school, in which case... *shrugs* You don't live there 365 days of the year, and you're not totally cut off from the outside world (unless it's a really fundamentalist school, I suppose.)

The fact of the matter is, why have sex with someone you're not attracted to (because you're heterosexual in a single sex environment) when your own hands and mind can do a better job? This is why I'm not 100% convinced of the idea of situational sexuality. I think it's more logical to assume that most people are bisexual to one degree or another.

Modifié par Zandilar, 01 avril 2011 - 11:54 .

[AlexMBrennan]

That is clearly true. But Carfax claimed that his attraction to males was due to complete isolation from women - whether that isolation was avoidable is not relevant to whether or not it caused this attraction.
Edit: Re Edit above: 

why have sex with someone you're not attracted to (because you're heterosexual in a single sex environment)

IMHO (not a univeral truth) that is because you will (eventually) be attracted to them in a single sex environment

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 01 avril 2011 - 02:25 .

[Sen4lifE]

Carfax wrote...

Zandilar wrote..

Most animals are sexually reproducing creatures. Check out the Bonobo for an example of a species where casual sex between members of the same gender occurs all the time as part of their social interaction. They, along with chimps, are among our closest cousins. Being gay does not preclude one from reproducing either, especially considering that ****** sapiens are a thinking technologically advanced tool using species. If you were to believe MSM, most (if not all) Lesbians exist solely to reproduce. (Yes, that is kind of a joke right there, but many of us are tired of all the "lesbian wants to get pregnant" storylines that get air time on TV.)

I personally don't like using animals as examples because they are so governed by their instincts, unlike humans. 

snip...

Someone is very niave.

[Sen4lifE]

Zandilar wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

I went to an all girls Catholic High School, and despite that I still socialized with plenty of boys.

That was (presumably) the point - that one will fall in love with/be attracted to anyone (eventually) if one is locked up with them for long enough. Whether one would/should be considered "gay"/"straight" as a result of this and other external influences (e.g. drugs) is, of course, debatable.

I think you missed my point, which was a single sex school does not spell the end of socialization with members of the opposite sex. Unless it's a boarding school, in which case... *shrugs* You don't live there 365 days of the year, and you're not totally cut off from the outside world (unless it's a really fundamentalist school, I suppose.)

The fact of the matter is, why have sex with someone you're not attracted to (because you're heterosexual in a single sex environment) when your own hands and mind can do a better job? This is why I'm not 100% convinced of the idea of situational sexuality. I think it's more logical to assume that most people are bisexual to one degree or another.

I agree with Zandilar.  Though there were girls in my area, I never really knew any, and hung out with guys.  I didn't even like the girls there.  I know this is a bit different from your situation you describe, but it does have a relation.  I don't believe in situational sexuality either.  Yes, it's true you may be away from women so long that you don't even care if it's a guy/girl anymore, but I do not think that is near as likely unless you are already sexually active, as the desire for sex does increase after your first time.

You know what I did? I waited.  I didn't try to bend my bros over.  And some people, in the situation above, just find that they were gay all along.  So I do believe that if you found attraction to those boys, there was a bit of homosexuality or bisexuality with you all along, whether you'd admit it or not.

However, growing up, it happens to everyone.  Many, many men would not like to admit it, but in that developing state, almost every male has that curious thought at least once.  And as far as the "being a real man" thing, a real man is able to admit it - because it happens to everyone.  You're still curious about that part of the world, and growing up you might feel attraction, if even so slight.

I think what splits you from homosexuality or heterosexuality is whether or not you act on it.  As in, a homosexual may have more than just a bit of curiousity and act on it, a heterosexual might have hidden curiousity as they're developing through adolescence, but if every actually confronted with that situation, couldn't even imagine themself actually doing anything.

It's complicated, but in a very round about way, we're all a little gay. xD

[Carfax]

Zandilar wrote...

There was a reason why I mentioned Bonobos in particular, and not other animal species. Bonobos in particular use same sex couplings for social reasons and for pleasure.

I understand what you were getting at, truly I do.  I was just trying to say that I think applying words like "homosexuality" to animals is pointless, seeing as there is no practically no discrimination in their actions.

They are ruled by their instinct and their lust, where as we have a choice.

But, I would also point out that at our basic level, we're just animals too. We still have our instincts which we still follow, and there's nothing inherantly wrong with that.

Yes, but humans being more consciously aware than other species, have the ability to completely refute their instincts if they so choose.  Thats what separates us from them..

And we have hands with thumbs and fingers, which can be used to stimulate those sexual organs too. A vaginal canal just as easily takes fingers as it does a penis. Yet it wasn't all that long ago that masturbation was just as stigmtized as being gay.

My point was, that as a result of being a sexually reproductive species, heterosexuality is imbedded deep in to our biological mechanism by default, regardless of whether you are straight, gay or bi..  This is true of practically every human being on the planet, because the number one purpose of sex has always been procreation, from a biological and evolutionary perspective. 

Thats why we are what we are.  If humans used something other than sexual reproduction for procreation, we would have a completely different physiology and there wouldn't even be two sexes.

And equating thumbs and fingers with actual sexual organs (that have a clearly defined purpose) is a bit silly now come on

If we truely contradict the natural order, don't you think humanity would have evolved past homosexuality? It is clear that homosexuality plays some part in the natural order, we might not understand what it is exactly, but there is some reason for it. If there was no reason, we would never have evolved to include that trait.

I personally don't believe gays contradict the natural order.  I'm just saying that that was the justification used for enacting extreme prejudice against them over the centuries..

After much research, it's clear to me that homosexuality (the orientation) is rooted in our biological makeup, and not something that you decide to do voluntarily. 

The prevailing theory now says that homosexuality is caused by imbalanced hormone exposure (namely testosterone) in the womb while the fetus is developing, which makes sense because while homosexuality appears to be innate, it doesn't appear to be genetic and isn't inheritable.

Also, males are about twice as likely as females to be gay, and since males require additional hormone exposure in the womb to become masculinized, then it makes sense that the chances of exposure to imbalanced hormones would be higher than that for females.

But... Uh... well they could relieve themselves, couldn't they? I mean honestly, if they had no bisexual leanings at all, wouldn't masturbation fill that need? (I think this is probably getting to the point where it's inappropriate for discussion on this forum... >.<)

I suppose they could, but having sex with yourself isn't nearly as exciting as having it with a partner wouldn't you say? 

I went to an all girls Catholic High School, and despite that I still socialized with plenty of boys. It probably helped that my hobbies brought me into contact with them - you know, computers and role playing. Made me an outcast at school, but you can't have everything. Surely you had opportunities to interact with girls?

Perhaps I should have mentioned that the school I went to was a boarding school located in another country.  There were no female students whatsoever, but we did have female teachers; most of whom were very old and very unattractive I should say.

Anyway, homosexual behaviour is fairly common in these single sex environments.  I remember catching two boys kissing each other in the locker room once, and they made me promise not to tell anyone LOL!

BTW, here is a very interesting (but disturbing) video you might be interested in watching.  The video demonstrates how environment can have a tremendous impact on our sexual behaviour:



Now keep in mind that Afghanistan is a country with extreme segregation between the sexes.  Women are practically invisible in that country (think burkhas), and a man attempting to have sex with a woman (vice versa as well) he isn't married to is subject to the death penalty.

So what you end up with is a culture in which boys have usurped womens' position as the most sexually desired partners for men.

Modifié par Carfax, 01 avril 2011 - 05:05 .

[FlintlockJazz]

Moondoggie wrote...

I think some folks are just afraid of the real world where rejection is part of life so in their games they want to get what they want no matter what factors are involved. Personally i'd like more realistic aspects in game romances too but i doubt we'll see it as most players want the dating sim approach where you can get them to fawn over you just by chosing the right options. I think these people are setting themselves up for a fall when they see somebody they like and hit on them to get a reply of "ugh i'm straight get away from me!" Which ultimately happens more often than not unless you're in a club that caters especially for gay people and you have much more chance of success XD.

I agree and it's fair enough, I just would relate to my character more if they failed as often as me.  Not that I play as myself, it just feels like a Pimpmobile sometimes in these games.  As for setting themselves up for a fall, I fortunately don't have to deal with that problem, instead I repulse regardless of gender or orientation.

[Hannibal218]

I have to say, folks, that when you make the statement "I'm not homophobic but..." "Or I'm not against _____ but..." You are saying, in effect, "I'm not against X but this is why I'm against it..." or "I'm not homophobic but here is why gay people scare me..."

I've seen this statement on every post that is complaining about the presence of gay characters so folks, why keep on fronting?

[Eternal Phoenix]

April fools?

[Hannibal218]

No.