546 réponses à ce sujet

[The-Sapient]

DRUNK_CANADIAN wrote...

Your analogy is as bad as your typing, the toggle option only affects the individual playing the game, not the masses, concessions were made for sake of inclusion, I think the OP has some right to request this option to better their gaming experience. Nobody is harmed in the process, although he probably should have brought it up about 4-6 months ago.

You are flat out wrong (except about my typing).  Inclusion of a bigotry button validates that
bigotry.  Do you think a Jewish person would have to right to be offended by a "No Jew" toggle?  You might argue that they could simple choose not to use it, and are therefore not harmed.   

If the OP has asked for such a toggle, on the grounds that he doesn’t like the idea of Jewish people, would
you think he had a point? 

These ideas do not exist in a vacuum.  There is real world context.  And that is where the harm is.  

Modifié par The-Sapient, 19 mars 2012 - 03:12 .

[Walrusninja]

Indeed warrior, it's back to the "it wouldn't be forced on anyone, if you don't like it, don't use it" ideal.

[Russalka]

Maybe in the future people are more comfortable with their sexuality, so that they wouldn't take same-sex flirting or simple friendly intimate conversation as somekind of a threat...

Modifié par Russalka, 19 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[Well]

gamer_girl wrote...

Sykoschematic wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

Sykoschematic wrote...

Nejeli wrote...

Sykoschematic wrote...

I don't know who Zevran is but i'm pretty sure that's an accurate representation. Damn, I couldn't have a conversation with Cortez that didn't involve him being gay so I stopped talking to him after the second time I tried.

Cortez is grieving for his husband, and he feels guilty for being unable and reluctant to move on, despite it being what Robert wanted, so he ends up talking to Shepard about it when Shepard asks. Yeah, that's totally pushing his gay on you. He has more lines about ships than he does about "being gay" unless you romance him.

Would you be complaining about 'not being able to have a conversation that didn't involve him being straight' if it was a wife instead?

Since being straight is a norm of society it would therefore be a normal conversation. I would not have a problem with him grieving his wife.

that...is just so homphobic and hypocrytical

This. So Ashley's been shown as religious, should I go and protest against the inclusion of Ashley's dialogue about God simply because I don't share the same beliefs? Or maybe the gay community should protest against the inclusion of o/s dialogue because they aren't interested. Maybe we should just censor everything and cut out the narcissistic middle man for the sake of the poor poor homophobic community that has to go through the horribly traumatic sight of a video game character communicating their sexual orientation that leaves them with both physical and emotional scars, and simply unable to go on with their lives... >_>

Is it me or do all the gays and gay sympathisers result to trying to belittle those who don't share their views?
Just my views.

To put a spin on your little phrase: Not everybody has to like homosexuality. Get used to it.

Don't be mad, bro.

Is it just me or do all the homophobes try to justify being homophobes?

Very few people like homophobes. Get used to it.

Don't be intolerant, bro.

The intolerance is labeling someone on a few statements.I notice with some folks they are quick to slap on the person they are a homophobe if they don't tow the line.Guess what folks people have different views.You don't have to like it.Whine,pout and throw a temper tantrum but newsflash it won't change.I don't like bigots.If I went and was to slap that on you by your standards it would be ok.Just a note:Try practicing what you preach.Oh wait it is ok for you to be intolerant.Sorry my bag.

[Tirigon]

The-Sapient wrote...

You are flat out wrong (except about my typing).  Inclusion of a bigotry button validates that
bigotry.  Do you think a Jewish person would have to right to be offended by a "No Jew" toggle?  You might argue that they could simple choose not to use it, and are therefore not harmed.   

If the OP has asked for such a toggle, on the grounds that he doesn’t like the idea of Jewish people, would
you think he had a point? 

These ideas do not exist in a vacuum.  There is real world context.  And that is where the harm is.  

That would apply if sexual orientation would in any way affect the characters in the game. But for me it seems as if it doesnt, it is more like something tacked on because for some reasons, romances are important in BioWare games (not that I disapprove, I like mah Liara:wub:)



Edit: And a note with regards to above post, would you all be so kind to avoid pyramid quotes? It only spams the thread and makes it hard to read.

Modifié par Tirigon, 19 mars 2012 - 03:16 .

[The-Sapient]

Tirigon wrote...
That is like saying "if you hate that guy you are a murderer even if you restrain yourself and never ever hurt him".

Huh?  Murder is an activity.  Sexual orientation is not.  You have to murder someone to be a murderer.  You do not need to have sex with someone to have a sexual orientation.  

[gamer_girl]

Point is, you can't explain why you're attracted to them based solely on character can you? Human beings are for lack of a better word "programmed" to be the way they are. I don't know why I think the way I do, as I don't know why others think the way they do - it's just how we were born.

[justlogme]

Not that I've seen. All romanses seem pretty far in and seem you can only romance 1

[Volus Warlord]

Russalka wrote...

Maybe in the future people are more comfortable with their sexuality, so that they wouldn't take same-sex flirting or simple friendly intimate conversation as somekind of a threat...

There are plenty who treat heterosexual flirting like a threat, lol. Why should there be any exceptions?

[gamer_girl]

The-Sapient wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
That is like saying "if you hate that guy you are a murderer even if you restrain yourself and never ever hurt him".

Huh?  Murder is an activity.  Sexual orientation is not.  You have to murder someone to be a murderer.  You do not need to have sex with someone to have a sexual orientation.  

This. Sexuality is a state of mind unlike murder which is an act. That's like saying that someone who is happy but pretends to be sad is sad because that's what they are showing.

[superwarrior]

@j78

No, i don't think u mean to be rude so no probs, you seem reasonable. The truth? I've been looking into ideologies and theories/studies about socio/economic issues for the past few years. Why? Because my country and the world currently is a bit of a mess and it filtered down to my curent livelihood. And it mostly comes down to this; human behaviour. So i made it a point to study as much as i can and try to understand the aspects, not just sexuality. Learning about life and people and the world/universe in other words...to better apply myself. Good thing surely no?

[The-Sapient]

Tirigon wrote...

That would apply if sexual orientation would in any way affect the characters in the game. But for me it seems as if it doesnt, it is more like something tacked on because for some reasons, romances are important in BioWare games (not that I disapprove, I like mah Liara:wub:)

If the OP were asking for a romance toggle,because romance does not interest him, it would be a different and less volatile
request.  But saying he doesn’t want to see a certain kind of person  because he does not like that kind of person in real life is different.  

Modifié par The-Sapient, 19 mars 2012 - 03:19 .

[ToJKa1]

Russalka wrote...

Maybe in the future people are more comfortable with their sexuality, so that they wouldn't take same-sex flirting or simple friendly intimate conversation as somekind of a threat...

Keep dreaming

The surprise girl sex with Traynor was a pleasant one, so i'd like the possiblity of that sort of surprises in the future 

And her comment "Suck it up princess" made me laugh more than these forums

[Volus Warlord]

gamer_girl wrote...

Point is, you can't explain why you're attracted to them based solely on character can you? Human beings are for lack of a better word "programmed" to be the way they are. I don't know why I think the way I do, as I don't know why others think the way they do - it's just how we were born.

Your  "programming" is FAR from set in stone.

I for one would not recognize myself now from say 5 years ago.

[Tirigon]

The-Sapient wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
That is like saying "if you hate that guy you are a murderer even if you restrain yourself and never ever hurt him".

Huh?  Murder is an activity.  Sexual orientation is not.  You have to murder someone to be a murderer.  You do not need to have sex with someone to have a sexual orientation.  

Maybe that is so. But tell me: If you dont actually engage in sexual activities, is it not a mere catchphrase then?
How can you even be sure about it?

I mean, of course it depends on your country - if you live in Afghanistan you might want to not live up to your wishes so as not to get stoned, but assuming you live in Europe or North America, you are free to do whatever you want. If you do not date the guy you are attracted to, then ARE you really?

[gamer_girl]

Volus Warlord wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

Point is, you can't explain why you're attracted to them based solely on character can you? Human beings are for lack of a better word "programmed" to be the way they are. I don't know why I think the way I do, as I don't know why others think the way they do - it's just how we were born.

Your  "programming" is FAR from set in stone.

I for one would not recognize myself now from say 5 years ago.

Programming is actually accurate because if you've ever programmed in your life you'd know that "const" variables exist. Sexuality is one of the const variables.

[Walrusninja]

I think the realities of homosexuality may be just as complicated, varied and interesting as the discussions had about it

Modifié par Walrusninja, 19 mars 2012 - 03:23 .

[Russalka]

Volus Warlord wrote...

There are plenty who treat heterosexual flirting like a threat, lol. Why should there be any exceptions?

I did not mean to imply there should be.

[Volus Warlord]

gamer_girl wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

Point is, you can't explain why you're attracted to them based solely on character can you? Human beings are for lack of a better word "programmed" to be the way they are. I don't know why I think the way I do, as I don't know why others think the way they do - it's just how we were born.

Your  "programming" is FAR from set in stone.

I for one would not recognize myself now from say 5 years ago.

Programming is actually accurate because if you've ever programmed in your life you'd know that "const" variables exist. Sexuality is one of the const variables.

Lol. I've done plenty of coding. 

What says sexuality is set to constant? What says that it cannot change? 

[gamer_girl]

Tirigon wrote...

The-Sapient wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
That is like saying "if you hate that guy you are a murderer even if you restrain yourself and never ever hurt him".

Huh?  Murder is an activity.  Sexual orientation is not.  You have to murder someone to be a murderer.  You do not need to have sex with someone to have a sexual orientation.  

Maybe that is so. But tell me: If you dont actually engage in sexual activities, is it not a mere catchphrase then?
How can you even be sure about it?

I mean, of course it depends on your country - if you live in Afghanistan you might want to not live up to your wishes so as not to get stoned, but assuming you live in Europe or North America, you are free to do whatever you want. If you do not date the guy you are attracted to, then ARE you really?

If you're going to the philosophical route of things, then we can't be certain of anything. But in reality it's pretty damn easy to tell what you're attracted to. Just because context influences whether or not you act on your sexuality doesn't change what your sexuality is. Ex. Being gay used to be so frowned upon that they would be killed simply for having their sexuality. Gay people would have to pretend to be straight because the motivation was right - that doesn't change the fact that they were gay.

[Tirigon]

gamer_girl wrote...

If you're going to the philosophical route of things, then we can't be certain of anything. But in reality it's pretty damn easy to tell what you're attracted to. Just because context influences whether or not you act on your sexuality doesn't change what your sexuality is. Ex. Being gay used to be so frowned upon that they would be killed simply for having their sexuality. Gay people would have to pretend to be straight because the motivation was right - that doesn't change the fact that they were gay.

In their own mind, yes. But to everyone else they were very much straight - or "normal" as one would have wrongly said in these dark times.

[gamer_girl]

Volus Warlord wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

Point is, you can't explain why you're attracted to them based solely on character can you? Human beings are for lack of a better word "programmed" to be the way they are. I don't know why I think the way I do, as I don't know why others think the way they do - it's just how we were born.

Your  "programming" is FAR from set in stone.

I for one would not recognize myself now from say 5 years ago.

Programming is actually accurate because if you've ever programmed in your life you'd know that "const" variables exist. Sexuality is one of the const variables.

Lol. I've done plenty of coding. 

What says sexuality is set to constant? What says that it cannot change? 

Tell me has your sexuality changed? I doubt it. The only thing that could be even close to "changing" is that it usually isn't realized fully until people grow up - because of peer pressure etc people stay in the closet and try to convince themselves that they are something that they aren't.

[The-Sapient]

Tirigon wrote...


Maybe that is so. But tell me: If you dont actually engage in sexual activities, is it not a mere catchphrase then?
How can you even be sure about it?

I mean, of course it depends on your country - if you live in Afghanistan you might want to not live up to your wishes so as not to get stoned, but assuming you live in Europe or North America, you are free to do whatever you want. If you do not date the guy you are attracted to, then ARE you really?

Speaking for myself personally, I was attracted to women well before I was sexually active.  I didn't need to have sex to know I was straight.  I assume this is true for others based on what they say.  

Of course this is different when we observe non-human animals.  We can only judge them by their behavior.  They can't tell us what they.  We can only observe what they do.  But with humans, we can indicate our attractions without acting on them.

[j78]

superwarrior wrote...

@j78

No, i don't think u mean to be rude so no probs, you seem reasonable. The truth? I've been looking into ideologies and theories/studies about socio/economic issues for the past few years. Why? Because my country and the world currently is a bit of a mess and it filtered down to my curent livelihood. And it mostly comes down to this; human behaviour. So i made it a point to study as much as i can and try to understand the aspects, not just sexuality. Learning about life and people and the world/universe in other words...to better apply myself. Good thing surely no?

Absolutely. super warrior then you are the man to ask is the reaction a religious thing? I know every culture has a name for gays and some cultures even revere them what is the problem here in the west .

[gamer_girl]

Tirigon wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

If you're going to the philosophical route of things, then we can't be certain of anything. But in reality it's pretty damn easy to tell what you're attracted to. Just because context influences whether or not you act on your sexuality doesn't change what your sexuality is. Ex. Being gay used to be so frowned upon that they would be killed simply for having their sexuality. Gay people would have to pretend to be straight because the motivation was right - that doesn't change the fact that they were gay.

In their own mind, yes. But to everyone else they were very much straight - or "normal" as one would have wrongly said in these dark times.

But your defence was that the mind creates everything and that people "choose to be straight or gay". If you're now basing everything about a person on what *you* see, instead of an immaterial thing like the mind, doesn't that throw your whole idea out the window?