Ce sujet est fermé
Because as someone who identifies as sexually ambiguous, both hearing that the person who counted as representation wasn't and that they don't want to go that route again thus pretty much confirming I'll never get a representation in one of the LIs is very depressing.
With no offense intended, I'm not sure how someone can identify as "sexually ambiguous". Ambiguity is a matter of perspective.
Would you care to elaborate, if it's not too personal?
Because as someone who identifies as sexually ambiguous, both hearing that the person who counted as representation wasn't and that they don't want to go that route again thus pretty much confirming I'll never get a representation in one of the LIs is very depressing.
I am a bit confused though. Didn't you disagree with me when I said we were looking more for representation because you felt choice of who to romance was a preferable over representation?
I agree there should be more variety
I finally want a real female elven LI (with elves looking normal again, so Merril doesn't count)
and also dwarven & qunari love interests
I'm bored with all these Human LI's (I romanced Leliana in Origins and Isabella in II)
I don't want artificially force diversity that isn't justified for the story and the setting. If that's not trying hard enough then i'm happy not trying hard enough.
Are you saying that no story can justify a group of less than ten non humans traveling together in human lands? That there is no way that can possibly be anything other than artificial?
I am a bit confused though. Didn't you disagree with me when I said we were looking more for representation because you felt choice of who to romance was a preferable way to do romances?
I don't recall this conversation. What thread was it in?
An organization formed by an offshoot of the Chantry and named after an ancient Andrastian organization is comprised primarily of Andrastian humans?
How can this be?!
I don't recall this conversation. What thread was it in?
I may be misremembering. I'll have to do some searching. I was just of the presumption that you didn't like set sexualities because they restricted choice of who to romance.
So are you sexually or romantically attracted to men or women? Because I was under the impression sexual ambiguity meant you can't easily tell what gender a person is or you can't outwardly tell what their sexual orientation is, but not an actual orientation in and of itself.
I don't recall this conversation. What thread was it in?
With no offense intended, I'm not sure how someone can identify as "sexually ambiguous". Ambiguity is a matter of perspective.
Would you care to elaborate, if it's not too personal?
To use as basic terms as possible, you know how heterosexuals can pretty much definitively say they like the opposite gender, homosexuals the same gender, and bisexuals both genders? Well, I don't have that. If someone came up to me and asked "What gender are you attracted to?" my answer would be "I don't know."
Sexually ambiguous isn't the term for it, but I haven't found one that fits better yet. Demisexual is pretty close I suppose.
I may be misremembering. I'll have to do some searching. I was just of the presumption that you didn't like set sexualities because they restricted choice of who to romance.
Oh, that.
Yes, I was one who was against gender and race gating because I thought people should have options in a RPG.
You might have missed the conversation from a few days ago. Sasha is using that term because that's what David calls it.
IIRC, she's demisexual in that she does not feel general sexual attraction but if she meets a man or woman who she is emotionally attracted to, she then experiences sexual desire exclusively for that person.
This thread I believe.
Thanks for answering that post, Maria. I missed it.
And sorry for missing your post, Ailith.
can some explain what "sexually ambiguous" as a sexual orientation is?
Are you saying that no story can justify a group of less than ten non humans traveling together in human lands? That there is no way that can possibly be anything other than artificial?
I'm saying that the party shouldn't determine the story. If there's an amazing compelling story justification for having a party with no ties to the area or areas surrounding where the story is set then ok, but that seems highly unlikely imo. Personally i'm excited about inquisition companions because i think they are going to bring perspective to what's occurring and much prefer that to shoehorning in a female qunari in.
Humans run the topside of Thedas with Dwarves and Elves being a minority.
So unless the next game deals with specifically dwarven or elven problems as the main story line ( something the humans only have minor interest in) you are going to have more humans if the problem or threat directly effects Thedas.
can some explain what "sexually ambiguous" as a sexual orientation is?
I answered above to Former_Fiend.
To use as basic terms as possible, you know how heterosexuals can pretty much definitively say they like the opposite gender, homosexuals the same gender, and bisexuals both genders? Well, I don't have that. If someone came up to me and asked "What gender are you attracted to?" my answer would be "I don't know."
Sexually ambiguous isn't the term for it, but I haven't found one that fits better yet. Demisexual is pretty close I suppose.
Thanks for answering that post, Maria. I missed it.
I'm saying that the party shouldn't determine the story. If there's an amazing compelling story justification for having a party with no ties to the area or areas surrounding where the story is set then ok, but that seems highly unlikely imo. Personally i'm excited about inquisition companions because i think they are going to bring perspective to what's occurring and much prefer that to shoehorning in a female qunari in.
To use as basic terms as possible, you know how heterosexuals can pretty much definitively say they like the opposite gender, homosexuals the same gender, and bisexuals both genders? Well, I don't have that. If someone came up to me and asked "What gender are you attracted to?" my answer would be "I don't know."
Sexually ambiguous isn't the term for it, but I haven't found one that fits better yet. Demisexual is pretty close I suppose.
Between your description here and Maria's summation of a previous conversation I missed out on, I'm actually reminded of Natashina's description of pansexuality in that it's less about physical attraction and more about emotional attraction.
I'm saying that the party shouldn't determine the story. If there's an amazing compelling story justification for having a party with no ties to the area or areas surrounding where the story is set then ok, but that seems highly unlikely imo. Personally i'm excited about inquisition companions because i think they are going to bring perspective to what's occurring and much prefer that to shoehorning in a female qunari in.
You can give perspective while dealing with the minority element. Varric gives us one facet of the surface dwarf experience but hardly the whole picture. LIkewise, Sera isn't going to give us the sum total of what it means to be a city elf. We haven't had a vashoth or a tal'vashoth party member yet, either, though Iron Bull's going to be skirting that line.
Just because these people represent the minority of "human lands", doesn't mean they have no ties to it and can't offer perspective.
Not a problem. Did I get it right?
Very close, yes.
that's what David calls it.
I always took the term as David applied it to be an external one, as opposed to one of self-identification.
In terms of self identity, I don't think having set sexualities precludes someone from having a characteristic where they're uncertain of how to identify specifically. Though externally people will label the sexual orientation based on the potential pairings anyways. If the character ends up being able to be with someone of the same sex, people will describe that character as gay, if it's the opposite sex people will describe the character as straight. If it's possible for the character to end up with either a man or a woman, then people will call the character bisexual.
But does any of these prevent the character from existing in a way where they are uncertain of their own sexual identity and where it lies?
Between your description here and Maria's summation of a previous conversation I missed out on, I'm actually reminded of Natashina's description of pansexuality in that it's less about physical attraction and more about emotional attraction.
The difference is the degree of sexual, physical and romantic attraction. This website explains it much better than I ever could.
Just an example, I consider myself panromantic in that I am romantically attracted to men and women and people that do not consider themselves as part of the gender binary. But I don't feel "pansexual" is right for me because I do not experience sexual attraction to any persons.
Between your description here and Maria's summation of a previous conversation I missed out on, I'm actually reminded of Natashina's description of pansexuality in that it's less about physical attraction and more about emotional attraction.
After I considerated all current romance possibilities, I rather choose to romance broodmother for male inquisitor andn hurlock number 65 for female
D'aww I'm so happy for you both. 
As for me, I'm still undecided on who my fem Inquisitor will romance or if she will bother at all.
I get the frustration that comes from making Merrill character bisexual but there is a problem with having all character ambiguous and that is bi erasure. There is also a problem making all of them bisexual.
For better of for worse David Gaider was strongly criticized of using playersexual and ambiguous sexuality on various places, a lot of people wanted the devs to use set definitions. The problem is that not everyone uses set definitions. As a demisexual I was disappointing with the reveal, I really though that Merrill was on that spectrum. That is why I still think forcing them to set all of them was bisexual is as bad as put them as ambiguous, either way there is erasure.
I still don't like characters who ambiguous, because I don't really like ambiguities. I don't like that a straight person can say"Well Merrill is straight on my playthrough because bisexuals are gross. " And again, it feels like bisexual erasure.
But I would love it if they actually wrote some demisexual characters or if they were unambiguous about a characters ambiguity (if that makes sense). Like it'd be awesome if you could actually talk to a character about it, or however.
Again Sasha, bring this up regularly, because demisexuality and like identifications have just about never been portrayed in media, and you suffer more erasure than bisexuals do. If
I think I get what you are saying. Like to use Merrill for an example if she actually expressed that she has never been attracted to anyone before and doesn't know what she is but knows she is attracted to Hawke, thus being unambiguous about being sexually ambiguous, it would have been better?
Alright, I will.
Retour en haut