645 réponses à ce sujet

[ademska]

Harid wrote...

Strawman arguments and anecdotal evidence.

Par for the course in this discussion.

Let's make more gigglesquee posts about Merrill, as we can't have a discussion like adults on this topic anyhow.

versus what, arguing to take away player choice in a game about... choice?

don't throw your fallacial terms around an argument that is truly, truly one-sided.

now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

[ipgd]

ademska wrote...

because gays are strange and are only 10% of the population, that means only one in ten party members should be gay. why don't you understand statistics, ipgd?

Of course, what was I thinking? Dragon Age adheres to other demographical statistics so well. The overrepresentation of gays is clearly evidence of Bioware's insidious homosexual agenda.

[Rinji the Bearded]

ademska wrote...

ipgd wrote...
I have more than four bisexual friends. I really do not understand how or why four is somehow so unrealistic that it renders all of these characters non-people.

because gays are strange and are only 10% of the population, that means only one in ten party members should be gay. why don't you understand statistics, ipgd?

Bisexuality =/= Gay.

Also, applying real world demographics to a fictional universe?  Let's make most people of asian ethnicity while we're at it.

[Harid]

ademska wrote...

Harid wrote...

Strawman arguments and anecdotal evidence.

Par for the course in this discussion.

Let's make more gigglesquee posts about Merrill, as we can't have a discussion like adults on this topic anyhow.

versus what, arguing to take away player choice in a game about... choice?

don't throw your fallacial terms around an argument that is truly, truly one-sided.

now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

You and ipgd are both using strawman arguments right now.

I have argued to increase choice from the get go and some how I am some  kind of homophobe or whatever.  This is getting tiring.  You can't have any type of argument on this issue on the interwebs because people get hyperbolic and create stupid slippery slope arguments that do not go anywhere.

And the way bisexuality was done in this game was exactly that, pandering.

I'm tired of repeating myself in this argument, but stop exaggerating and stating that people are trying to take away choice from you when many people have different, defined decisions on this topic.  It doesn't help any cause.

Modifié par Harid, 22 juin 2011 - 08:43 .

[ademska]

RinjiRenee wrote...

ademska wrote...

ipgd wrote...
I have more than four bisexual friends. I really do not understand how or why four is somehow so unrealistic that it renders all of these characters non-people.

because gays are strange and are only 10% of the population, that means only one in ten party members should be gay. why don't you understand statistics, ipgd?

Bisexuality =/= Gay.

Also, applying real world demographics to a fictional universe?  Let's make most people of asian ethnicity while we're at it.

the next time i deploy my sarcasm torpedoes i'll be sure to give fair warning, bb ... like right now.

[In Exile]

ademska wrote...
now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

I think it's disrespectful towards all three orientations. It's one thing to have an actually bisexual character (e.g. Isabella). It's another thing to have an openly gay character. But to have characters that are, essentially, into the progatonist is just something that diminishes everyone.

[Rinji the Bearded]

The game's already out, four of the companions are bisexual. Bioware's decision, pandering or no (and it's not as if certain straight LIs cannot be pandering to a certain audience, oh no).  You either deal with it, or make your life awful for yourself.

I'm guessing some of us chose the latter.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 22 juin 2011 - 08:47 .

[Herr Uhl]

Filament wrote...

Hawke has the air of a refined gentleman, it is only natural that he attracts those of a similar disposition to his "cause."

Apart from Varric, which party member is even close to being a refined gentleman?

[Harid]

In Exile wrote...

ademska wrote...
now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

I think it's disrespectful towards all three orientations. It's one thing to have an actually bisexual character (e.g. Isabella). It's another thing to have an openly gay character. But to have characters that are, essentially, into the progatonist is just something that diminishes everyone.

I've made this point several times.  No one listens.  Because we are trying to subjugate them by limiting their choices.  Some of us just feel the narrative should come before fanservice.

And people are complaining, I figure, in the hopes that Bioware doesn't do it again.  That's something consumers are generally given the ability to do.

Modifié par Harid, 22 juin 2011 - 08:48 .

[yaw]

22nd MadJack wrote...

Paraded wasn't quite the right word.  Prevelant is more suitable.  If we are to back track a little I will try to further articulate why I disliked it's implementation.  Firstly, the prevelance of bisexuality in DA2 essentially broke my suspension of disbelief.  I couldn't believe these characters were real.  I began to view them not as autominous, believable entities, but rather as binary  constructs built to politically correct specifications.  Essentially they are not people.  People are not just bisexual, they are straight and homosexual also. 

^ This.

If Thedas was a universe where everyone was pansexual, it would be fine. There would be absolutely no issues. But it cleary isn't, and the fact that all (not counting DLC) of your romancable companions (including Aveline, you could argue) are bisexual is just... uncomfortable.
If you want to argue that it's not so strange to know such an concentrated number of bisexuals, that's okay. The real issue is, as MadJack said, it makes the character feel fake and constructed. Not bisexual because it's part of their character, like Zevran is, but bisexual because they have to be. 

It would just make for a higher quality of writing if your companions consisted of a spattering of straight and bisexual characters, and preferably purely homosexual characters.

Besides, are our characters always some kind of burning beacon of raw sexuality? Why should they have so many romance options? What about a little dejection, a little heartbreak? Seen as AI can't judge attractiveness, sexuality could deal with this. 

[ipgd]

Everything is pandering. Literally every single choice made in a commercial product is at least partially motivated by a desire to appeal to someone and thereby increase profits. If that is really your reason for combating "too many bisexuals", you should probably not be enjoying anything.

The demographic argument is a weak one because, again, the size of Hawke's party is not a statistically relevant sample size. His party could be made up entirely of gays and that would not even necessarily be unlikely. Stastical concerns of likelihood are entirely irrelevant until Hawke starts toting around a party size in the hundreds. Some people do not have social circles that are statistically adherent, as, say, I do not.

[ademska]

Harid wrote...

ademska wrote...

versus what, arguing to take away player choice in a game about... choice?

don't throw your fallacial terms around an argument that is truly, truly one-sided.

now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

You and ipgd are both using strawman arguments right now.

I have argued to increase choice from the get go and some how I am some  kind of homophobe or whatever.  This is getting tiring.  You can't have any type of argument on this issue on the interwebs because people get hyperbolic and create stupid slippery slope arguments that do not go anywhere.

And the way bisexuality was done in this game was exactly that, pandering.

I'm tired of repeating myself in this argument, but stop exaggerating and stating that people are trying to take away choice from you when many people have different, defined decisions on this topic.  It doesn't help any cause.

again with the fallacy terminology! i've taken philo 101 too, you know. i've even taken my lsat!

i don't believe i ever quoted you in any comment i made. i believe i quoted madjack with his silliness and every other dweeb on the last page who made a blanket statement of, "i don't like bisexuality in as few as four characters because i see sexuality as a defining make-or-break trait in character writing instead of as just another aspect of sex like sane people!"

[ademska]

the core problem of so many people here is that they perceive bisexuality as a mythical unicorn character trait that implies a whole slew of stigma re: sexual attitudes.

i want to blame this on the media for its few realistic portrayals of bisexual characters, except for da2 which is so matter-of-fact in its presentation that i consider it far more helpful than not...

but, yeah, you're all adults.

[Harid]

ademska wrote...

Harid wrote...

ademska wrote...

versus what, arguing to take away player choice in a game about... choice?

don't throw your fallacial terms around an argument that is truly, truly one-sided.

now, if we want to get back to the more civilized bisexual-versus-heterosexual-versus-undefined sexuality discussion we were all having before mr jack up there decided to waltz in and decry bisexual characters as unrealistic pandering to customers interested in buying a game, i'm more than happy.

You and ipgd are both using strawman arguments right now.

I have argued to increase choice from the get go and some how I am some  kind of homophobe or whatever.  This is getting tiring.  You can't have any type of argument on this issue on the interwebs because people get hyperbolic and create stupid slippery slope arguments that do not go anywhere.

And the way bisexuality was done in this game was exactly that, pandering.

I'm tired of repeating myself in this argument, but stop exaggerating and stating that people are trying to take away choice from you when many people have different, defined decisions on this topic.  It doesn't help any cause.

again with the fallacy terminology! i've taken philo 101 too, you know. i've even taken my lsat!

i don't believe i ever quoted you in any comment i made. i believe i quoted madjack with his silliness and every other dweeb on the last page who made a blanket statement of, "i don't like bisexuality in as few as four characters because i see sexuality as a defining make-or-break trait in character writing instead of as just another aspect of sex like sane people!"

Sexuality is a defining trait in a person.

If it weren't the case, I don't think so many gays would make the correlation between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement. as so far that one is a visible minority, and the other is not.

Every time a person says something to the effect of "Gays could hide their gayness, black people cannot" Gays get mad, because they feel being gay is a LARGE part of their selves, and they feel they shouldn't have to hide themselves from people, yes?  Conversely, one should feel that Hawkesexual characters are an insult to themselves, because sexuality is a large part of what makes you you.  You can't then, have it both ways and state it isn't a big deal here, but is so in real life.  That's hypocrisy.

The only bisexual that was written decently, was the actual bisexual, Isabella.  And please don't act like homosexuals are any better at treating bisexuals than straight people, please, there are stigmas on both sides.

Modifié par Harid, 22 juin 2011 - 09:05 .

[ademska]

Harid wrote...

ademska wrote...

again with the fallacy terminology! i've taken philo 101 too, you know. i've even taken my lsat!

i don't believe i ever quoted you in any comment i made. i believe i quoted madjack with his silliness and every other dweeb on the last page who made a blanket statement of, "i don't like bisexuality in as few as four characters because i see sexuality as a defining make-or-break trait in character writing instead of as just another aspect of sex like sane people!"

Sexuality is a defining trait in a person.

If it weren't the case, I don't think so many gays would make the correlation between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement. as so far that one is a visible minority, and the other is not.

Every time a person says something to the effect of "Gays could hide their gayness, black people cannot" Gays get mad, because they feel being gay is a LARGE part of their selves, and they feel they shouldn't have to hide themselves from people, yes?  Conversely, one should feel that Hawkesexual characters are an insult to themselves, because sexuality is a large part of what makes you you.  You can't then, have it both ways and state it isn't a big deal here, but is so in real life.  That's hypocrisy.

someone's not done any reading on the gay rights movement, i see <3 or has as good an understanding of argumentative logic as he seems to think

it's only a 'defining character trait' in our world because people have chosen to differentiate it legally and socially. those people, of course, decidedly not being the "gays" . this is fact, not opinion.

i swear, it's like no one knows how to separate cultural and historical aspects of our own world from a fictional one.

[ipgd]

Harid wrote...

Gays get mad, because they feel being gay is a LARGE part of their selves, and they feel they shouldn't have to hide themselves from people, yes?

No. Gays get mad because their sexuality is made out to be a much bigger deal than it is -- that other people define them entirely by their sexuality, such a tiny, insignificant fact in the long run -- and that they are forced, not to hide this small fact, but to rob themselves of all the incidental things that come along with it, like being able to have an honest relationship and a family, if they want to be treated with a shred of the human ****ing decency straight people are afforded.

Some people embrace and identify with the LGBTQ community because it is the only place they feel welcome, but that community has little to do with the base biological attractions they experience.

Modifié par ipgd, 22 juin 2011 - 09:08 .

[Harid]

ademska wrote...

Harid wrote...

ademska wrote...

again with the fallacy terminology! i've taken philo 101 too, you know. i've even taken my lsat!

i don't believe i ever quoted you in any comment i made. i believe i quoted madjack with his silliness and every other dweeb on the last page who made a blanket statement of, "i don't like bisexuality in as few as four characters because i see sexuality as a defining make-or-break trait in character writing instead of as just another aspect of sex like sane people!"

Sexuality is a defining trait in a person.

If it weren't the case, I don't think so many gays would make the correlation between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement. as so far that one is a visible minority, and the other is not.

Every time a person says something to the effect of "Gays could hide their gayness, black people cannot" Gays get mad, because they feel being gay is a LARGE part of their selves, and they feel they shouldn't have to hide themselves from people, yes?  Conversely, one should feel that Hawkesexual characters are an insult to themselves, because sexuality is a large part of what makes you you.  You can't then, have it both ways and state it isn't a big deal here, but is so in real life.  That's hypocrisy.

someone's not done any reading on the gay rights movement, i see <3 or has as good an understanding of argumentative logic as he seems to think

it's only a 'defining character trait' in our world because people have chosen to differentiate it legally and socially. those people, of course, decidedly not being the "gays" . this is fact, not opinion.

i swear, it's like no one knows how to separate cultural and historical aspects of our own world from a fictional one.

You have basically said nothing here and have not made any kind of point.

[ademska]

then maybe ipgd can knock it through your skull.

[Harid]

ipgd wrote...

Harid wrote...

Gays get mad, because they feel being gay is a LARGE part of their selves, and they feel they shouldn't have to hide themselves from people, yes?

No. Gays get mad because their sexuality is made out to be a much bigger deal than it is -- that other people define them entirely by their sexuality, such a tiny, insignificant fact in the long run -- and that they are forced, not to hide this small fact, but to rob themselves of all the incidental things that come along with it, like being able to have an honest relationship and a family, if they want to be treated with a shred of the human ****ing decency straight people are afforded.

Some people embrace and identify with the LGBTQ community because it is the only place they feel welcome, but that community has little to do with the base biological attractions they experience.

If being gay is such a small part of what makes you a person, then why the comparisons to a movement that was largely based on a large part of what people were and were held down for?  Outside of a pity party.

People are playing both sides here.

But to PM's please.  The thread is being derailed, and I am more than welcome to hear more about that movement from PM's, a large part of the gay movement is obfuscated by comparisons to the civil rights movement, and as such most people could not name 5 people who have made a difference in the gay pride movement because of it.


You can't say something is a small part of what you are when it is a big part of what you are; people are moved by societal details, they influsence when things are big and things are small.  I wish I could drive in certain neighborhoods without being harrassed by police.  I wish I could walk in certain neighborhoods without women clutching their purses, I wish I wasn't expect to act like a rapper or am told I talk so well by people because the expectation is for me to be some kind of hood, but the world doesn't work that way, and pretending it does is lying to oneself.

Modifié par Harid, 22 juin 2011 - 09:20 .

[ipgd]

Harid wrote...

If being gay is such a small part of what makes you a person, then why the comparisons to a movement that was largely based on a large part of what people were and were held down for?  Outside of a pity party.

Uh, it wasn't? "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" -- the point of the black civil rights movement was the same, that skin color didn't and shouldn't matter, and that the people who ascribed such importance to the pigment of someone's skin as to treat them with prejudice were abhorrent.

[Huntress]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Why does this bother people so much? Now we have one game among precisely a gazillion where same-sex relationships is represented on equal terms with heterosexual ones and we can't even have that?

Only one who bothers are the ones who complain about it, am a woman and married to a man, having a game with characters that are Bi, gay or angels won't bother me a bit. I know what I like, I know what am, they sure are not.