107 réponses à ce sujet

[andar91]

Actually it wasn't so much homosexuality that was frowned on but the role taken in the act, homosexuality among the nobles was considered ok provided they took the dominant (male) role in the act rather than the submissive (female) role.

Ooops, this may be a double post.

 

But yeah, this is true, I believe.

 

It's important to remember that cultures conceive of sexuality in different ways depending on their circumstances, needs, and just plain...happenstance, I guess you would call it. In fact, I have some reservations of applying terms like 'homosexual' to a character in a fantasy universe since that term doesn't really apply to cultures outside modern ones. I recently read an article that I absolutely cannot find that talks about it - but basically, every culture is different. This includes marriage, sex, romance, and everything in between. Calling Shakespeare gay, for instance, is kind of like calling him a Republican (this is an example I remember from the article). The term doesn't really apply to his culture.

[thebatmanreborn]

How interesting would it be if they did things with a little twist:

 

1. Slavery. In the B.C.'s slavery did not have the same connotations it does today. People were not treated like the "slaves" we think of. In fact, slaves were called servants and were given a living that included clothes, shelter, and food. When the time of their servitude was finished, the servant had a choice to stay with his/her master out of love. And they often did. They would become bondslaves and would have their ear pierced as a show of gratitude and appreciation for their master. Not all societies treated their slaves like this. Understand that the Romans were horrible to their slaves...well, I won't get into that because it is gruesome. The point is, we only have a one-sided view of Tevinter. They have slavery! They must be evil! What if they are not? Here is an interesting fact: did you know a lot of slaves fought willingly against the North in the Civil War in America? What if Tevinter treat slaves a whole lot better than you could possibly imagine? To be fed, well clothed, and taken care of beats being homeless. Again, this adds some depth to the culture. I would love to see them go this route. You don't have to agree with them, but now you can see the circumstance from a different viewpoint.

 

2. Homosexuality. There is nothing wrong with being against something as long as you are not hating the person. What if Tevinter views sexuality as a choice. For purity? For religion? For the sanctity of marriage between a male and female? Again, it adds a new dimension to the story world. You don't have to agree with them. But many cultures throughout history have had their reasons for banning homosexuality. Interesting fact: no empire that has embraced the open practice of homosexuality lasts. They have all crumbled. Why is that? See, just another avenue to explore. Why should it be embraced? The best stories don't have an agenda or a stated theme. They simply ask difficult questions and make you think.  

 

 

[Iakus]

 

I think what David Gaider is alluding to is that, as long as you come from a powerful family line of magisters inTevinter, you have a duty to spread your seed, as it is, in order to keep the family bloodline going. After that, who you sleep with or engage in sex with is not a problem. 

 

That seems to be the case.  With nobility in general, not just Tevinter, it seems important to provide heirs to continue bloodlines.  If Tevinter is working to breed supermages, or whatever, among their magisters, that "duty" may be considered even more important.

[SwobyJ]

How interesting would it be if they did things with a little twist:

 

1. Slavery. In the B.C.'s slavery did not have the same connotations it does today. People were not treated like the "slaves" we think of. In fact, slaves were called servants and were given a living that included clothes, shelter, and food. When the time of their servitude was finished, the servant had a choice to stay with his/her master out of love. And they often did. They would become bondslaves and would have their ear pierced as a show of gratitude and appreciation for their master. Not all societies treated their slaves like this. Understand that the Romans were horrible to their slaves...well, I won't get into that because it is gruesome. The point is, we only have a one-sided view of Tevinter. They have slavery! They must be evil! What if they are not? Here is an interesting fact: did you know a lot of slaves fought willingly against the North in the Civil War in America? What if Tevinter treat slaves a whole lot better than you could possibly imagine? To be fed, well clothed, and taken care of beats being homeless. Again, this adds some depth to the culture. I would love to see them go this route. You don't have to agree with them, but now you can see the circumstance from a different viewpoint.

 

2. Homosexuality. There is nothing wrong with being against something as long as you are not hating the person. What if Tevinter views sexuality as a choice. For purity? For religion? For the sanctity of marriage between a male and female? Again, it adds a new dimension to the story world. You don't have to agree with them. But many cultures throughout history have had their reasons for banning homosexuality. Interesting fact: no empire that has embraced the open practice of homosexuality lasts. They have all crumbled. Why is that? See, just another avenue to explore. Why should it be embraced? The best stories don't have an agenda or a stated theme. They simply ask difficult questions and make you think.  

 

You know - questions like "Why should someone be outcast for their consensual sexual activities?"

 

Questions that make you think.

[Cainhurst Crow]

But that seems to contradict what this is saying.

 

Because, yeah, Celene is a lesbian (or at least bi), and she doesn't take pride in being different or think of it as rebelling, she just treats it as completely normal, which Tevinter doesn't seem to, regardless of whether its nobility or otherwise. 

 

Plus, forgive me but isn't power in Tevinter less hereditary and more power-won anyway, making the baby point redundant?

 

So you're saying nobles of orlais and magisters of tevinter have different standards and expectations thrust upon them? What lunacy be this?

 

And there's no real hint that power is bestowed meritocratically in tevinter, nor has that been stated in lore. Magic seems to run in bloodlines, and while it may skip a generation, there seems to be some evidence that certain genetic traits can line up ot make someone more attuned to the fade then others.

 

This seems to be the go-to argument, but it ignores the very obvious fact that nothing has ever, EVER stopped a person from performing their familial duties while still taking lovers on the side.  It's an extremely bad argument because fertility has never been negatively impacted by one's sexual preferences, and history is replete with examples of noble personages happily f*cking whomever their please even while they carry out their obligations to provide heirs.  There's no reason in the world for this to necessitate Tevinter having a societal taboo against nobles engaging in non-hetero sexual relations.  Obviously there would be a societal impetus to engage in procreative relationships that DID perpetuate strong bloodlines, but that hardly negates the possibility of companionate relationships.

 

I think you are forgetting Dorian's character description, which is a rebel and someone who embraces his difference. Why would someone who is rebelious and embracing of the element that makes them an outcast, go against that difference and fall in line with their societies standards?

[thebatmanreborn]

You know - questions like "Why should someone be outcast for their consensual sexual activities?"

 

Questions that make you think.

Is there another way to look at the argument? Have you helped "outcasts" by making "outcasts" out of those with opposing views? Do terrorists have another side? What about the murderer? What about the person at your work place or school or in the grocery store that may have hurt you or said something bad about you? Do we ever stop to think about where they are coming from? Are we too quick to judge? And how about doing drugs? What affect does all of this have on the human brain? It can go on and on. The point is you do ask difficult questions. You be open minded, to a point. You are caused to think. And I have always enjoyed those stories. Not an agenda. Just posing the question. Is this person so evil for thinking the way they do? If so, what makes them so evil? And are they redeemable? Is anything I'm saying making sense or am I just rambling. I might just be rambling. Yea, pretty sure I am just rambling. Oh well. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Is there another way to look at the argument? Have you helped "outcasts" by making "outcasts" out of those with opposing views? Do terrorists have another side? What about the murderer? What about the person at your work place or school or in the grocery store that may have hurt you or said something bad about you? Do we ever stop to think about where they are coming from? Are we too quick to judge? And how about doing drugs? What affect does all of this have on the human brain? It can go on and on. The point is you do ask difficult questions. You be open minded, to a point. You are caused to think. And I have always enjoyed those stories. Not an agenda. Just posing the question. Is this person so evil for thinking the way they do? If so, what makes them so evil? And are they redeemable? Is anything I'm saying making sense or am I just rambling. I might just be rambling. Yea, pretty sure I am just rambling. Oh well. 

 

I agree, in some ways. Anyone who raises issues or questions in fiction "to make you think" shouldn't provide a yes or not answer to them that can't be challenged or are made to be frowned upon if you disagree with the author. Because that doesn't make one think, it tells them how to think instead, and removes the point of raising the question in the first place.

 

Like you said, agendas in stories ruin the stories, and I hope the team remembers this and doesn't make people forced to side one way or the other, and be finger wagged to morally about it.

[KainD]

There is nothing wrong with being against something as long as you are not hating the person. 

 

Wait.. wait what? If I am against something, naturally I will hate people that support it. 

[thebatmanreborn]

Wait.. wait what? If I am against something, naturally I will hate people that support it. 

Not necessarily. A father could be against his daughter doing heroin. He sees the heroin destroying his daughter. That's his perspective. He loves his daughter. The daughter's perspective? The heroin is a release for her. The stress, the depression, it had been weighing down on her mind. And she feels the only thing keeping her alive is the heroin. Her dad is against what she believes is ok. She doesn't hate her dad, but they do disagree. You don't have to hate people. You can agree to disagree. 

[Eternal Phoenix]

Good. Sounds like it'll lead to some interesting scenarios and development of gay characters rather than them just being there for the romance (something I don't desire to experience as I'm not gay and therefore the romances don't interest me). I don't think many games have actually tackled homosexuality before in this way and Dragon Age (thus far) has included it as something that nobody cares about. Tevinter (whilst clearly not persecuting homosexuals) sounds closer to the views on homosexuality that society mainly shared only a hundred years ago. This idea will add a lot of diversity to the customs and traditions of Thedas which we've only been exposed to little of and, IMO, it will lead to a more interesting world.

 

I wonder if we'll see some sexism from the Qunari people too while we're at it. I am tired of "mature" RPG's never touching upon these issues and instead replacing them with fictional racism. For gaming to grow, we need real world topics covered just as they are in books and movies. The Witcher 2 is a good example with portraying sexism as it was in the real medieval times if you ask me, with many women there living only to serve men and having certain roles in society with only a few note-worthy women having positions of power.

 

Some people may like the "you're a male/female but no one will ever mention your gender for the sake of being inoffensive" but we have too many games like that now. Obviously I'm not asking for games to be based around a whole racist/sexist plot where these things are brought up every minute but it would be nice to have it referenced in the world for a change instead of gaming being too afraid to mention these real world issues and it shouldn't be afraid to include every perspective on these issues.

 

Edit:

 

This is the first I had heard of Dorian's sexuality but I guess I should have expected it with that mustache of his.

 

In fact he now reminds me of Freddie Mercury...

 

 

[KainD]

Not necessarily. A father could be against his daughter doing heroin. He sees the heroin destroying his daughter. That's his perspective. He loves his daughter. The daughter's perspective? The heroin is a release for her. The stress, the depression, it had been weighing down on her mind. And she feels the only thing keeping her alive is the heroin. Her dad is against what she believes is ok. She doesn't hate her dad, but they do disagree. You don't have to hate people. You can agree to disagree. 

 

Because that's two peoples different lives, and their relationship is more important to them than these things. I'm talking about direct influence on each others lives. Believe me if the girl tight up her dad and drugged him instead, it would be a very different story, and that father could hate her afterwards, unless again the relationship is more important to him. It's priorities, and I wasn't talking about disagreements with people that are close to me, because that's a completely different story. Then again I get close to people that I tend to agree with, so.. A little complicated. 

[SwobyJ]

Is there another way to look at the argument? Have you helped "outcasts" by making "outcasts" out of those with opposing views? Do terrorists have another side? What about the murderer? What about the person at your work place or school or in the grocery store that may have hurt you or said something bad about you? Do we ever stop to think about where they are coming from? Are we too quick to judge? And how about doing drugs? What affect does all of this have on the human brain? It can go on and on. The point is you do ask difficult questions. You be open minded, to a point. You are caused to think. And I have always enjoyed those stories. Not an agenda. Just posing the question. Is this person so evil for thinking the way they do? If so, what makes them so evil? And are they redeemable? Is anything I'm saying making sense or am I just rambling. I might just be rambling. Yea, pretty sure I am just rambling. Oh well. 

 

In the end, what you DO matters.

 

Did YOU outcast someone for their sexuality?

Did YOU permit it?

 

Did YOU try to understand it?

 

Understanding discrimination isn't too hard once you've lived it. It becomes very recognizable. And then, again, what you DO about it matters. Do YOU make it worse? Do YOU permit it? Do YOU let it happen to you again?

 

What is 'purity' if all it means is harming others? Outcasting them? Leaving them on the streets to rot?

 

~~~

 

On the drug matter, you can feel sad about it all you want, but then you DO something. Good or bad. And often, permitting it is also a conscious action. Intervene, understand, converse, use force, whatever. Or, you know, let it be done more safely then with things like dirty needles, and then guide the addicted towards a program that leads them out of it. Just a thought.

 

I understand that all of these matters are multifaceted. I'm not actually against a story where we come to see a society that doesn't, say, approve of homosexuality at all, and we get to see their (also understandable) reasons for it. But if we're gonna see that, we better see the very REAL consequences of that position. And there are many. Not incredibly vague 'empires fell at the same time they embraced homosexuality' utter guesses, without a lick of proof or even remotely good logic behind it.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Wait.. wait what? If I am against something, naturally I will hate people that support it. 

 

I'm against strict gun control, find it a waste of both money and resources the government could use better in actual crime prevention.

 

I don't hate people who support higher gun control, until they start trying to demonize or openly mock the other side unfairly.

 

Being against something is being against an issue, not the people involved.

[KainD]

Being against something is being against an issue, not the people involved.

 

People make the issues. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

People make the issues. 

But people aren't personifications of the issues.

 

I can make a math equation but I am not myself the math equation.

[LinksOcarina]

People make the issues. 

 

It's not just people. They help though.

 

For example, people like playing Call of Duty. Call of Duty pays millions to put real guns in their game, money that goes into the gun industry. Does everyone who plays Call of Duty really love real-life guns? Not necessarily, but for those who are, should they stick to their morals and not play Call of Duty because of this fact?

 

That is being against an issue. 

 

Now, if you have an NRA member hawking wares door to door to tell you about the evils of the government, then its a person making it a personal issue. People will always try to push an agenda, for good or for ill, on others if they see fit. the agenda is an issue they care about, but not necessarily the issue that is in question, its usually skewed and distorted because it becomes personal in the end.

[Medhia_Nox]

Tevinter's stance isn't a homophobic one, it is purely a pro-creative one.

 

They prefer slaves to be gay because gays - as a general rule - don't breed.  They hate it in nobles for the exact same reason.

 

Once again, it is a question of eugenics.  If they could pro-create scientifically (as we can now) they would likely not care one way or another about it so long as you gave up the baby batter.

 

This fits perfectly in my view of Tevinter.  Now I just need to see them promoting Tranquility and the Harrowing on even harsher terms than the rest of Thedas - and my view of this draconian society of eugenically superior mages is complete.

 

Dorian is notably bright even for a Tevinter - that means quite a lot.  The fact that he won't pro-create is a huge insult to his house.

 

This has nothing to do with being gay actually.

[BloodyTalon]

Gee hate and  being against something are two different things.

If you  hate people that have different views then you, that says a lot about the type of person you are. A lot of crimes and wars have started for such things.

[KainD]

A lot of crimes and wars have started for such things.

 

Yes, that's normal. Everybody can't co-exist happily, unfortunately. 

[BloodyTalon]

Yes, that's normal. Everybody can't co-exist happily, unfortunately. 

Yeah always healthy to remind people when such topics start going this way.

[Spectre Impersonator]

Huh, too bad. I kinda like this guy but now my female Inquisitors will be vag-teased like my FemSheps were with James Vega!

[thats1evildude]

How interesting would it be if they did things with a little twist:

 

1. Slavery. In the B.C.'s slavery did not have the same connotations it does today. People were not treated like the "slaves" we think of. In fact, slaves were called servants and were given a living that included clothes, shelter, and food. When the time of their servitude was finished, the servant had a choice to stay with his/her master out of love. And they often did. They would become bondslaves and would have their ear pierced as a show of gratitude and appreciation for their master. Not all societies treated their slaves like this. Understand that the Romans were horrible to their slaves...well, I won't get into that because it is gruesome. The point is, we only have a one-sided view of Tevinter. They have slavery! They must be evil! What if they are not?

 

Except the accounts we've heard all point to slavery in the Tevinter Imperium being exactly as bad as we all think it is.

 

We've heard from the former slaves, Fenris included, talk about the abuse they've suffered at the hands of the magisters, and we've seen the actual bodies of slaves sacrificed in blood magic rituals to gain extra power. In the comics, we've seen the dream of a Tevinter magister who wanted to make a world where slaves suffered when they could not obey their masters' commands.

 

And that's without getting into ancient Tevinter, where they were even worse.

[Nashimura]

Huh, too bad. I kinda like this guy but now my female Inquisitors will be vag-teased like my FemSheps were with James Vega!

 

Yea, i remember having no straight options at all with my femshep in me3, that was not ideal. They could of at least let me have Vega.... I think DA:I needs to avoid locking you out completely based on certain combinations of race and gender. 

[KainD]

Tevinter Imperium being exactly as bad as we all think it is.

 

We? All? Lol

[thats1evildude]

We? All? Lol

 

Sorry, I meant to say "all of us who aren't blood mage fanboys." You're exempt, KainD.